For those of you looking at this camera in 2024, Sigma now makes 3rd party lenses for Canon which was not the case two years ago when this video was made.
Well, i really like the camera ☺️ Specially together with Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. Heavy, yes, but image is really good in my opinion ☺️ Hope we’ll see good quality, fast and more affordable RF-S lenses than the RF counterpart down the road.
Canon aren't going to give you the glass you want. The trajectory of their product line and lens system tells us all we need to know. Anybody who can't or isn't willing to spend on Canon's grossly overpriced glass is going to be left out of it. Harsh but true. I shoot Sony and I'm not a fan of a number of aspects of the system. I do like the big range of often high quality glass.
Great insight. I've been a Canon user since the '90s. I have some L glass that I love. I've always liked their user interface. But I'm finally thinking it's time to go mirrorless, and I'm looking elsewhere. Their recent shenanigans over third-party manufacturers of RF mount lenses helped ease the decision. I may revisit later, but I'm nearing retirement and my next system will likely be my last. (Not like Canon needs me, of course. 😂)
For a few reasons I don't see their restrictions on 3rd party RF lenses as much of a limit. OTOH, if you want to avoid companies that enforce their IP rights you're going to find a lot more limits on what's available to you. What annoys me is other decisions they make that are (presumably) based on the bottom line instead of giving us the best products. The video says the R7 is "the least compromised" but there are lots of compromises. I'm primarily interested in wildlife, so what I was really hoping for was essentially an APS-C version of the R5. They came close, but (especially considering they're already offering the market an inexpensive APS-C with the R10) I'd rather see a $2000 to $2300 price in exchange for a better sensor and processor(s). What annoys me even more is that somebody made a decision that's probably going to turn out to be a complete deal breaker. My current Canons all have a Canon +2 viewfinder correction lens that gives me much more than the extra +0.5 correction I need in addition the built-in -3 to +2 correction in order to use the camera without my glasses, but it looks like they've discontinued all of those correction lenses. There's no way I'm spending even $500 for a camera that only offers a blurry viewfinder if there's an alternative, so that's the reason I'm also looking at moving to one of their competitors.
@@suedenim9208 I have been a Canon user since the EF system was available in the 1986 and am nearing retirement. I never switched to the RF system because of my investment in EF. This crippling of the R7 by removing the diopter correction for the viewfinder means I'm completely staying away from Canon for good. I needed a smaller high megapixel system for landscape and have opted for the 40 mp Fuji's with the fixed fast primes. I'll stick to my Pentax K-1 for other types of landscapes and my Canon 7DMkII with 100-400 with 1.4 extender for wildlife and my 6D/5DMkII w 135F2 for portraits.
I use a Canon R6 as my main camera and the R7 is my supplement especially for small wildlife photography. I’m not a pro, but I am happy for my cameras. I only use Canons PRO lenses, eg. 100-500 mm as an example. That lens gives me 800mm equivalent on the R7.
Now finding out that other manufacturers are forced to quit producing RF lenses… no sigma trio (16, 30, 56mm) for this one. No tamron, no viltrox, no samyang… in my mind the r7 was going to be the best budget camera of the past years and in the last week it has become the most likely to fail. Sorry canon, tried to love you but you keep making it hard to.
I pre-ordered r7 and after waiting for over a month I heard about two new RF lenses for about $800 that are not as compelling as sigma art 24-70 f2.8. I canceled my order. I am upset with Canon lineup and prices. I think I will go for Sony full frame and sigma lens.
They are now approving some third party on a case by case basis. They just don't want a bunch of junk out there and people blaming their cameras for poor results.
Here we are a year later and still, there's absolutely nothing new here. It's all "deja vu". Unfortunately Canon did the same with its EF-S & completely lost it with its E-FM cropped system. Canon missed the boat and actually crippled the M system from day one. I don't believe they're will be many new RF-S lenses released in the foreseeable future. Canon want you to use expensive FF lenses on your APS-C body if you're after the best. Personally I'm happy to use my RP as my main camera, I only use my R7 when I need the extra reach using my RF lenses even though the R7 beats the RP in most other areas. Having said that, I've just invested in the EOS M2 to experiment with the Magic Lantern software and see what the fuss is all about.
I don’t understand. Your arguments make sense for the every day person that does not do this for a living. You appear to be a professional - making money off this. If you do, why did you ignore the rf 24-70 2.0. Rent it, join CPS, buy it and write off the expenditure? Everything full frame 35mm is going to be big and heavy if you want speed and quality even third party especially so for any kind of zoom. Honestly from a professional pov this sounds more like you trying to talk yourself into going micro 4/3. I mean what if you guys decide to get into cine cameras like the c300? Those things ain’t exactly tiny or light. Rf glass is pricey that I will give you but mirrorless had made finicky ef lenses into modern killer glass. My 85mm 1.2 focused like shit on my 6d for the last 10 years and no amount of adjustments from canon or myself with software ever made it work like it should. I had to mostly manual focus. Moving to mirrorless? Still slow as hell to focus but accurate every time due to focusing on the sensor and not a mirrorbox. One day I may invest in RF glass, but just as micro 4/3 cameras with adapters made Olympus and Pentax users cheer with joy as they were able to adapt killer old manual focus lenses from practically anyone pre 1980, mirrorless has breathed new life into my lens collection - some over 25 years old like my 300mm 2.8 non is - and I feel no need to delve into RF right now. That will come in time.
Is anyone a photographer today? Seems like everything is about picking cameras apart. I wonder how Ansel Adams achieved the quality of work he did with a camera he had no reviews on UA-cam to watch? I personally find the R7 an excellent wildlife camera... Get real people.....
depends what you are shooting. For sports and wildlife photographers, the R7 is a keeper - giving more reach than any FF camera can ever hope to do. We're already using heavy super telephoto lenses, so we're not gonna whine about a bit of weight. Most of us will be using EF glass with an adaptor, because the RF versions are well, vastly overpriced.
@@351linzdoctor interesting. What is Sony doing that Canon says FU then - crop mode on say, the R5 (45mp) is like 12 mp...it's obviously less for the R6 etc...I guess it's another instance of the Canon CrippleHammer™
@@351linzdoctor it's actually 17mp on the R5, and 8mp on the R6 from memory. But even then, 17mp vs 32 mp is a big loss in resolution imho. If you are shooting in reasonably good light, then the high ISO performance of the R7 doesn't really matter. From memory (I am no expert on Sony cameras) the A9 etc are far more expensive than a R5. And their animal eye detect AF is inferior too. This is also important for birding and wildlife photography, more so than high ISO imho, especially with the availability of PP software such as DXO Pure RAW 2 and Topaz Denoise AI. Noise on my ancient 60D (what I am using atm) cleans up very nicely up to ISO 2000 and that's probably a stop worse than the 7D II which I've just purchased but haven't had a chance to use yet duet work and weather.
I'm a wildlife/bird photog and a Nikon user... (currently a Z6ii) I almost pre-ordered an R7 for the 1.6 crop AND Canon's superior AF tracking. I just can't justify changing brands for a better AF system but I do hope Nikon answers with a mirrorless replacement for the venerable D500.
You focused (pardon the sorta pun) on a valid issue with Canon - the limited array of lens options. I am a long term (four decades) Canon user, mostly cuz I understand the menus and the system and the menu of futz work-arounds ... oh, and the investment in EF glass (I have an RF adapter). But, when I upgraded to an R5, I thought for sure it would be followed by a cavalcade of Canon and 3rd party lens. This has not really happened. 🙁 I also have a Canon M6 Mk2 which is my lightweight/compact backup system. I suspect this camera has the same sensor as the R7. For the size/weight/profile, the M6 Mk2 system works well [though I have always been somewhat disappointed with the color depth] ... And then Canon constructively abandoned the system/mount - once again strangling the lens array options. The M mount had some promise for smaller lighter weight lens systems. But, I posit, this also may have penciled out for smaller lighter weight profit margins. So ... the sensor got stuck into the R7 system.
I’m using the r7 successfully for event multimedia work as a B cam to the r5. I’m using adapted Ef 17-55 f2.8 and tokina’s 11-16 2.8 lenses with a VND adapter. I believe it works great for many scenarios but the lenses need to catch up.
I don't understand the obsession over size and weight. The difference is minimal between full frame mirrorless cameras once you attach the lens and I find that many Mirrorless lenses are massive compared to their dslr counterparts just look at the 1.8 nikon f vs z lenses.
I don't understand why stay in the past with a freaking mirror in a camera when technology allows for smaller and lighter cameras. I don't think Sony's E lenses are larger than DSLR counterparts. Also, the weight and size difference makes a big difference for hikers.
After watching this video, I am more than happy to keep my R7, while some people complain for hours online, we, photographers, are actually ... taking photos, great photos, the R7 is a great camera, best you can buy for the price, IMO.
Someone having an opinion or experience which differs from your own doesn't somehow make them less of a "photographer" than you. That kind of twisted logic is part of what poisons this form of art/hobby.
@Pablo you’re right. Taking photos are what most of the Canon cameras do best. The issue is the people who make UA-cam content about cameras rarely do just photos and these hybrid units are insufficient. But even then, why does anyone choose a crop sensor unit for strictly photography when the RP or R units are full frame for less money? They do wonderful photos but do lack high burst speed and IBIS. I’m not sure why landscape or portrait photographers looking to simply take pictures spend money on anything else honestly.
I tried the X-H2S, and it's the only camera I want at this moment. That could change. A 40mp Fuji is being launched soon in NY. The R7 is great, but the thought of investing in full-frame glass to squeeze the best performance out of it is nauseating.
The 7d II released at a price that would be $2200 today. They could weather seal it for an extra $700 but it wouldn't sell as well. I'd rather have the extra 700 personally.
Why on earth would you want to be photographing wild life in the rain in any case? Terrible light, don’t know what all the fuss is about. The vast majority of keen amateur shooters (and let’s face it, the vast majority that will use it will be amateurs) will never venture out in the rain in any case. I agree with the thrust of the points made here by 3BMaaEP though.
@@philfyphil most wouldn’t want too I agree, but for a few it’s necessary and part of their jobs. Also the weather can change quickly and having gear that you know is up to the challenge makes you feel better
I got burned by canon once. First camera was EF-M mount... right before they pulled the plug on it. I'm wondering if canon is going to do the same thing with RF-S. With a grand total of 2 lenses, they really aren't investing much into this ecosystem.
My comment is less about the R7 & more about Canon in general. I have mentioned in other videos that I Own the R6 & R5. Both are great cameras & are vastly enjoyed to use. I contemplated picking up the R7 as a 3rd body at weddings etc. But Canon is annoying me.. There is rumor that there will be yet another price increase on both lenses & bodies. And.. there is no sign that Sigma & or Tamron will have any authorized RF mounted lenses because Canon will not open up their mount. This annoys me. I want use of some solid primes without spending $2500+ to get them. I'm very close to picking up a Sony A74 & Tamron 28-75 G2 to try out the Sony System and see how I like it. It's not that I don't like the Canon System, but the company is really bothering me. I owe them NO loyalty. And I'm sick of them not listening to us while companies like Sony & Fuji seem to be giving their customers tons of things to make them happy. Something like 3rd party lens support allows me to be within a system & make money professionally and then upgrade later instead of being stuck without a lens in the focal length I want till I can spend $2800 on it. So.. I'll see, if I try Sony and it really fits me & what I need.. I may sell my Canon Gear & go full in on Sony. #Sony #Canon
2 years latter and the only issue with the R7 is there is no way to add a fully working vertical/battery grip. Everything else is a non-issue. At the price you can get one now, the R7 is a no-brainer.
I shoot mainly sports (with an R6) and I wanted the R7 to be my second body (and an 1.6x teleconverter for my Sigma 120-300/2.8 S) ... but Canon made the button layout completely different from the R6, gave the R7 great speed but a small buffer, no batterygrip... yes, and then the lens choices... so I cancelled my preorder and ordered a Z6II and a Z9. Until the Z9 arrives, I use the R6 and Z6II together, and the layout of the Z6II matches the layout of the R6 better for my needs than the R6 and the R7 (the R7 switches on/off roughly where my R6 changes aperture) do. Crazy world ;o))
many of us cannot afford 2 camera systems though...as much as Canon's overpriced RF lenses piss me off, and the lack of 3rd party RF glass competition due to Canon stifling competition, I am simply too deeply invested in the Canon ecosystem to change. Now, if someone wants to donate enough money for me to get a Nikon 500mm f4...
How are you finding the Z6ii for wildlife?. I'm at a crossroads to upgrading from a Nikon D7500 to either an R7 Sony A7iv or waiting for Nikon to release a Z6iii
Hugh. I love your videos. I love someone who speaks in their videos like they wrote a well reasoned, persuasive essay before filming, rather than the typical ‘mumbling through in a self-deprecating, perhaps even self-negating style’ Having said that, some advice: please stop crowing about full-sized HDMI ports in cameras. It’s just not going to happen. Avoid the mistake of looking at only the cable connectors. Look at the size of the port itself. And not just the size of the rectangular opening in the bank of ports on the body. No. Look at the *volume* that a full size HDMI port would eat up inside the camera body. They are HUGE inside an otherwise insanely cramped enclosure. It’s just not going to happen because to make it so camera manufacturers would have to sacrifice a major point of competition, camera body size. And they’re going to ask themselves, “If we can get the same function out of a smaller connector, why?” I could see the argument if we were talking dedicated cine cameras like a Red Helium or something where it needs to be bomb-proof for intense daily shooting under the brutal, militaristic conditions of Hollywood. The trade-off of a little size for ruggedness is common. Think laptops ruggedized for oil rig use, pelican cases, and astronaut gear at NASA. But for the vast majority of us, a full sized HDMI port just doesn’t matter when an adapter or adapting cable can be purchased if necessary. Is the micro-HDMI fragile? You bet! Is it fiddly? Yep. But it’s compact and that matters more than anything.
Correct that the R7 is aimed at bird/wildlife photography. It is working alongside with my R5. The R7 with the RF 100-500 is an excellent combo for me covering insects, birds, large animals, and sports.
@@aspotterabroad4145 17mp is still pretty good, unless u need to print A2 poster size or bigger? 17mp is perfect I would say. I used and 18 mp EOS 1DX for weddings for about 10 years and never had an issue with 20x30 inch enlargements.
Interesting to hear your frustration. We don't all have unlimited upgrade money, so we are all much more choosy these days. I have a bag full of EF glass but haven't updated my Canon camera bodies in some time! Meanwhile, Fuji has got better and better; as have phone cameras.
I'm still using my Sl1. I was hoping for a new version of the R10 but that does not look like it is happening this year. The real issue the new iPhone 16Pro will have 90% of the capabilities of the current R10 and it's about 2/3 of the price by the time I buy an R-Series lens for it.
Canon is continuing to prevent third parties from developing the RF platform. Another reason that I continue to use my SL1. They have allowed a couple of token third-party lenses but they are priced a stone's throw from the equivalent Canon lenses so are of no value to budget-minded customers.
While I was considering the r7 I am now putting a hold on this purchase. Canon's decision to issue cease and desist letters to Valtrex and perhaps a larger plan to prevent all third-party manufacturers from creating autofocus lenses for the rf mount means this is no longer an affordable platform for a casual photographer. While professionals have a budget and can justify paying double what a third-party lens is priced at in come cases I simply cannot. Being on a fixed disability income it's simply out of my budget. So for now I will look at using the new iPhone 14 and stick with my sl1 and forgo even the budget option R100 when it comes out. until this is resolved.
if are you in the US, I highly recommend that you formally complain to the US DOJ about Canon's actions being anti-competitive and monopolistic in nature. And keep complaining. And encourage your friends and family to do so to. Sustained pressure will get the US DOJ to investigate Canon.
@@davepastern I am in Canada. The real question is has Viltrox used Canon patented technologu in the contruction and operation of their autofocus lens? If they have they have a legitimate reason to request this acrivity be stopped. But at the same time I think Canon could make a great deal of money licencing the IP to Viltrox for markets they are iot interested in developing or pursuing. If this was done with the intention of stifling competition rather than enforcing legitimate patent ed technology then its anti-competitive. Good luck proving that.
@@PWingert1966 that is the million dollar question. 2 thoughts though: 1. software patents should be banned and made illegal globally - software code is based on maths, and maths is not patentable. A corrupt US government that wanted to protect US software companies like Microsoft, Apple, Oracle etc was more interested in protecting them than actually applying the rule of the law. Software patents promote anti-competitive and monopolistic behaviour and weaken the consumer experience, despite what the big software players would like to tell you. 2. using the RF protocol tech to establish a monopoly via killing the competiton is also, imho, illegal. The question is, will the corrupt US government do something about it, or will Canon buy corrupt US senators to get their way?
@@davepastern If there is money to be made they will enforce the patent. But I think in my case I am just going to not buy a camera for an upgrade to my SL1. My iPhone will vcover most of my photography needs and once I upgrade to the iPhone 14 I won't really need a camera.
Initially, I thought it would be a great 2nd camera for birding to my R5 with its 1.6x crop factor for extended reach and even faster frame rate. But no, the microscopic buffer size killed it for me. I decided to just to keep the R5 for now before I work out later whether I should still stick with Canon.
did you try CRAW and feathering the shutter button? Many wildlife/birding photographers have been very happy with the R7's buffer after doing the above.
The buffer isn't microscopic. I shoot wildlife, mostly action. I am currently working on a project on a falcon nest. Very fast moving. Using the R7 almost exclusively. I have yet to hit the buffer. 51 frames! That's only a few less than my R6. Most fast action is long over before I hit that! That's over 3 seconds at 15fps. That's better than the highly touted ("professional grade") 7dii 24 (as I recall) at 10fps.
To me the canon RF 1.8 primes are not the same quality of the competition. They all have a protruding lens element when it focuses. The lenses are either cheaply made or super expensive. Especially now since canon haa recent halted the 3rd parties that were mfg lenses. I've recently purchased a z30 and love the colors so much going to get the z50. Viltrox lenses make the zed apsc mount viable.
Jesus….. that was the most depressing yet vitally relevant and informative video I’ve watched on this camera, I was heavily debating purchasing the R7 but than I found out there’s no battery grip there’s no grip extensions and for myself personally there’s not a mirrorless camera that I’ve owned that didn’t have at least a smallrig on it, and there’s a serious lack of exciting glass that’s affordable and not the size of a CFL Spalding J5V football, I want to be excited about Canon I really do but it just doesn’t make sense
As you and many of the people making comments have outlined any camera choice is about “use case” along with price and fit in the hand. If all photogs agreed on gear and brand there would be only one maker and a huge hole in the UA-cam community. Very interesting piece and definitely not for you but for me the R7 is my B cam backup for my R5 at 1/3 the price and for that job I love it. Cheers from NZ 😀
Fork Canon. I’ve been pissed since they DELIBERATELY OBSOLETED my complete Canon FD system by making the new EOS bodies THICKER than the old bodies. No infinity focus using old lenses on the newer bodies. SCREW EM.....
Great reveiw! Amazing how much sharper the 24-70mm f2.8 L glass is over the 18-150mm lens. Better glass does look better in image quality. I am considering an Canon R vs. Canon R7 as priced similar and the full frame R could be a better buy for photos, and good enough for video is just mainly using HD 1080. Although for 4K video the R7 would be better than video on the cropped 4K of the original R.
Weird how spending 4 times as much actually gets you something, isn't it? What Ii find amazing is how much you get for the price of a lot of the relatively inexpensive lenses that are available.The extra reach of my EF 100-400 II is great, but I've gotten some excellent shots with the EF-S 55-250 kit lens that came with my Rebel. If you can spend the extra for the L lenses they're a good choice, but entry level gets you an awful lot compare to what was available 20 years ago.
I think I sense a clever conspiracy amongst Canon’s R&D, imaging and marketing teams to maximize profits with built-in guardrails steering us toward full-frame cameras. The new R7 is not a mirrorless 7D, the “affordable” lenses are f8 and f11, and the FF L lenses are EXPENSIVE. But, they may have found the formula that will make them a viable camera company in the long term.
I totally agree, Hugh. Some people rave about RF lenses but there's almost nothing compelling under $2k. Gotta give Canon credit where it's due though, they're slowly moving the on/off switch closer to where it should be (around the shutter button)!
I made essentially the same comment under Polin’s recent 1-year review of the R3. Essentially saying that I didn’t want to spend $1000+ just to get a lens that focused internally and was weather sealed. I was called a fool and told that I wasn’t professional enough for Canon’s L lenses. Fanboys are weird. I actually really considered an R6 too, but the lens selection (not to mention lens price) was a no go.
What’s the point of the R series cameras with the APS-C when they already have the EOS-M system which is a much smaller form factor and can adapt all of the existing EF and EF-S lenses if you just want to carry around a big heavy APS-C setup. Canon is wasting time with these junk R cameras. They need to make more large aperture, compact EOS-M lenses for the APS-C sensor format and leave the R cameras full frame.
Appreciate hearing your views to sanity check my purchase, but the repeated lens choice complaint is half-baked. @ 9:40 thinking this body should only be paired with an RF-S lens is nonsensical. Happy to send you amazing files adapted to the EF 24-70 II or EF 70-200 II, and the AF is seamless for the sports I shoot and superior to its functionality on the 5DIV. Can’t honestly complain about lens cost when a Leica is $8k! And the same adapter works amazingly on the R5
I bought the R5 14 months ago. 1 month ago I bought the R7. Now I'm selling my R5 for another R7 :) Plain and simply, the R7 is a better small bird combo.
Sir, the light on your right and front has created a nagging and very disturbing reflection on your glasses, causing us to loose vision of your right eye most of the video time😢
Those who have been around in the Canon camp for a while, seem to share the opinion that R7 is not a 7Dii replacement - it is more like an R70 model, if one was using the old DSLR naming convention. It is also no secret that the move to mirrorless design has allowed the manufacturer to reclaim their price dictating powers to recoup from the slump in profits mainly carved out by the mobile phones over the last 5-10 years. However for hobbyists like me, who own legacy EF glass but leveled off their purchases at 50D and 5Dii, R7 offers a better RF migratory path - in terms of local price/performance ratio - than RP or R6 do at the moment, and the more compelling move away from looking at second hand 5Div and 5DS(R) models. Good video, enjoyable as always.
I was thinking of switching from Fuji to Canon recently, I greatly prefer Canon's out of camera color and the better autofocus technology is pretty appealing, I really liked the R7's body. But I immediately dropped the idea after looking at the lens selection. It's extremely uncompelling.
@@nightowlnzab I don't think it's possible at this point lol. You basically can't get a better mirrorless APS-C system right now. After I decided that Canon wasn't going to work I'm now waiting to see the XH2 and the XT5 now I *really* want that 40mp sensor.
Don’t forget every EF lens works seamlessly with a $99 ($69 refurb store)canon adapter. I use the EF 70-200 + R7 for field sports and the AF is better than my 5dmkiv with the same lens. More shots in focus. Don’t be swayed into thinking you must buy RF glass. Save way more money and get amazing results. To be honest I wish I had an R5 but it is too much money
@@unknownKnownunknowns That would make a ton of sense if I already had EF glass. If you had the glass already and you're getting better results on the R7 it makes sense why you would do that. But I don't have any EF glass and I find it very concerning that a company refuses to properly support it's own mount and instead relies on adapters. It worries me that Canon won't support it properly ever and that makes it a tough sell to buy into it as a new system. Especially when I have a very strong lens ecosystem and mount support in Fuji it just doesn't make sense to walk away from that to a potentially dead end mount for relatively minor things like color science and autofocus.
Some great point well made Hugh. I have taken the plunge into mirrorless aps-c by getting the Fujifilm X-S10 as Fujifilm currently has the widest range of dedicated aps-c mirrorless lenses to suit most budgets and genres. For example, I recently purchased the tiny Fujifilm XC 35mm F2.0 lens for only £169 (brand new, UK) and it is tack sharp and has lovely colours, contrast and bokeh! I really don't see Canon, Sony or Nikon investing much into their mirrorless aps-c systems going off what they did (or did not) do in the past with DSLR's. Interestingly, the best selling digital cameras in Japan at the moment is still the Canon M50 II (twin lens kit).
I went to Fuji for similar reasons, Canon's RF lens catalogue is to expensive at the high end and to cheap at the low end, anyone wanting basic mid range lenses 24-70 / 70-200 etc.. is out of luck.
One year later nothing has changed. Canon threatened legal action against third-party lens manufacturers and then bricked the existing lenses and licenced expensive third-party lenses (Three in total) of middling quality and close to Canon's price. So, no I am not replacing my Sl1 with another Canon. I am waiting for the iPhone 16Pro at half the price and offering good enough capability for street photography and video making.
Extremely thankful for making this video. I was going to buy Canon R7 as my very first camera & now I am thinking of going to Sony A6600 for cheaper price and better lens ecosystem. Canon is making themselves the Apple of Camera industry, excellant product quality, high priced & closed system end to end Canon.
I would recommend trying out the 50mm f/1.8 with R10 or R7 to start out with; I am not certain the comment of lens ecosystem is a accurate comment given there is no price comparison with cost vs quality presented. Yes RF lenses are costlier than EF but from personal experience the quality is blew me away with Canon EF vs Tamron EF vs Canon RF. Sony does have some compelling lenses in G-master series that are in the same price ballpark.
@@ImranMYousuf I believe having a zoom range will give Me all round usage. With Sony I was planning to buy 18-50mm F 2.8 which is a pretty standard zoom range for all usage. But if I want this same lens for Canon it's equal to the price of Sony A7 IV body 😅. Yes 50mm might be useful for a few months but after that I will have to buy a zoom range.
Also with 50mm and 1.6x crop of Canon I will be getting 80mm which is too tight for streets atleast. I have a bit of experience on other's cameras shooting at 70mm.
@@avijitchakraborty3944 What you said is correct, for crop sensor as well my fav lens was 50mm (with 60D); later on 35mm and 85mm complemented it and now I almost exclusively use 24-70mm f/2.8 and 100mm f/2.8 macro...but yes you can not go wrong with Sony either.
@@ImranMYousuf ya I mean 18-50mm with 1.5x crop will give 27-80mm at F2.8 which I believe is a great range. But again do Full Frame & Crop Sensor matter a lot ? What are the ways one can bridge that gap ?
All this is why I didn’t go down the Canon mirrorless route when I could have done. Top quality but stratospherically expensive, huge and heavy red ring lenses, or else pretty middling silver ring ones. No third party alternatives. So I kept my extensive 1DX II / 5D III EF kit for sport and events and paired Leica SL2 with brilliant, relatively inexpensive and lightweight lenses from Sigma and Lumix for everyday use. Plus my M10-R of course. I take it all to Scotland whenever I go ! Leica for slow days, Canon for the Edinburgh Festival and the Braemar Gathering.
Been saying the same for a while. The limited lens options really hurt this system. I have an R7 with 18-150mm, a 10-18mm efs, and 24-105 ef. When using the ef glass and adapters people need to be mindful the stabilization benefits are not even close to what you get with rf lenses. That's to be expected but it is very different for video. Also I can't get past the way better lens options I have for my Sony a6600. I still use it at all my weddings. I barely use my r7 yet. I do like the image though
wow...I got chills: I'm in exactly the same position. My film SLRs are no longer practical (yeah, I know, I know, call me stubborn) and I need to go digital not just for photos but for corporate video; the choices are driving me mad with frustration! Sony are as bad as Canon for "little snags!" Trying to find the perfect balance between cost and practicality is nigh on impossible!
I ordered the R7 and plan to use it with my Sigma 50-100 f1.8, 18-35 f1.8, and will test my older Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 APO EX DC OS HSM with it. I also ordered the 100-400 and 800f11 so we will see. The RF lens line up does make this tricky and I also don’t like heavy glass. Used to be an M43 guy but my RX100M3, RX100M7, and RX10M4 took over those duties. Unfortunately my kids like to do sports in dungeons so I am back to heavy glass and semi larger sensor. I would love any insight on the R7 and sigma line up from anyone already using this combo.
Would I be crazy to go with Canon M mount at this point knowing they won't support it much longer? I just want that Sigma trio and M6ii and it looks like I won't be able to get it for an R10 or R7.
Crazy? No: we want what we want - that’s part of being human. But I wouldn’t be inclined to vote with my money for a company whose direction and/or values don’t align with my own.
I was surprised to see the jittery AF performance. I purchased an M50 and an M6 mk2 for a project I was doing. I used EF glass on them, with a viltrox speedbooster, and never experienced the type of problem you've experienced with your R7, which I would have assumed would blow the M series bodies out of the water!
In fact, all DSLRs and MILCs are primarily still photography cameras. That's what I treat them as. I'm never into videos so, couldn't care less about that. Therefore, My old 1DIV, 7D, 5D and 5DII are good enough for a hobbyist like me to keep shooting subjects of my choices everyday. When I do record few casual videos; my smartphone is good enough to take care of that.
Mostly agree on Canon RF cameras are not good selection, at least at the moment, with the pretty good and complete selection on Nikon Z and Fuji X mount. If you are saying the lens on Canon RF mount is expensive, Leica lenses are also expensive. The problem on Canon RF is their lenses image quality, except those f1.2 or 1.4 which are as good as their price tag, are lag quite far behind behind Nikon Z and Fuji X mount new lenses, not to mention Leica.
You nailed it. Other than users for whom the crop/reach would actually be a benefit, I’m just not seeing the appeal. The RF lens lineup is already sparse for those of us who aren’t made of money, and the RF-S lineup is way, way worse! I’d buy a plain old R or even an RP over the R7, all day long.
It's been odd to me that Nikon and Canon have invested in APS-C at all after going mirrorless. Their DX and EF-S systems were rich with lens options, back when it seemed to make more sense to stair-step back in the DSLR days from crop to full frame. Though I've never owned one, Nikon's D500 is considered a pro-level camera despite the smaller sensor. With almost no compelling lens options and no real reason to flesh the lineup out, lest they cannibalize sales of the really $$$ R glass, the R7 and R10 just don't make any sense to me. The same thing has occurred to me when Fujifilm shooters ask for a full-frame camera, ostensibly out of sensor size envy. It makes sense for Fuji to exist in the two realms it has chosen, where the difference is great enough to justify owning both systems if a photographer's needs call for it. But no company these days is pursuing both APS-C and FF systems with equal vigor - Sony occasionally shines here, but it's clear their hearts are really in FF and they're slowly leaving the cropped cameras behind. It stands to reason Canon and Nikon might be attempting it because past marketing decisions in the DSLR era told them it will be successful, but with the camera market so contracted since then it doesn't seem like there will be room for these in-between bodies to survive.
I think I may still check out the R7 for video. I have the RF 85 f2 and the 24mm 1.8 IS macro looks pretty cool. That’s a 38mm on the R7, it may just never leave my body lol.
I pre-ordered the r7 aiming to use it with my sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 50-100 f1.8 and canon 17-55mm f/2.8 all work with the adapter excellently with an R5. Since they started action to prevent other lens producers I e cancelled my pre-order and traded the lenses in - time to shift systems!
They only stopped one company from making RF mount glass and that's because they were making garbage. I highly doubt they will do the same with Sigma and Tamron. But you go ahead and switch systems.
Damn. I wanted to buy the R7 for sports but I am afraid of the noise the crop sensor might have. I am shooting a R6 right now but I need tighter shots. I have my 70-200 but I really need a 300. Obviously that is an expensive lens. I thought ok I can get tighter with the crop factor but what am I sacrificing? Should I just get the 120-300 2.8 sigma to pair with my R6, which is a $3500 lens or get the R7 body which is around $1200. Decisions.
i think sensors have still come a long way and tbh pairing the R7 with your R6 might not be a bad idea. what you sacrifice, i think is the depth of field. and software these days can denoise. what have you done in the end?
There is a reason I’m looking at the Leica CL and the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8. I just can’t find a comparable or compelling camera and lens combo that is this light and has reasonable amount of glass available for it. Also it’s a Leica. I considered the Canon R7, the Nikon Z50, and others, but they don’t give me the desire for them, also the lack of APSC glass isn’t great. If you could please do a video with the Leica CL and the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8, I would love to hear your opinion of it as well as other APSC Sigma L mount lenses.
Sounds like you should check out Fuji my friend. Spoilt for choice with glass and more on the way. The XF 16-55 is an incredible lens. In fact all their lenses are!
@@chrisjames1924 What's going on with all these Christophers on one comment? I'm with you 100% though Chris J. If anyone's focused on sticking with APS-C, then Fuji's definitely worth a look. And the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 that Chris B referenced is supposed to come to Fuji X sometime in December (news coming from Sigma themselves). Even though Sony has released some nice crop glass lately, Fuji still gives you a variety of body types, which I like. And "budget" models are often less compromised than with other brands.
@@ywmedia don't get me wrong, the fujifilm bodies look awesome and the only comparable model for me would be the Fujifilm XE-4, but... there is something about the images that come out of the fuji that I don't like, and I've been looking at a lot of sample photos on Flickr, and I find that I like the output of the Leica CL.
@@christopherbartleson8918 You certainly wouldn't be alone in having issues with the way some of the X-Trans sensors render. I've only ever used Capture One with Fuji so I've not had any of the issues some people had with worming in PS/LR. The earlier X-Trans sensors definitely have a more filmic quality to them. In fact the X-Pro 1 and X100s are probably my 2 favorite Fuji cameras. To anyone reading this not called Chris, I'm sorry but only Chris's are allowed in this conversation.
Everything you said made perfect sense to me and was pretty much a reflection of my journey with Canon. I started my DSLR journey with a Rebel XT with the kit lens in 2005. Once I knew what I was doing, I bought a 28 mm f/1.8 and upgraded to a 7D in 2010. As my budget and skill improved, I started wanting faster and better lenses with fixed apertures. That's when I realized that Canon pretty much had a single fast(ish) zoom made for APS-C: the 17-55mm f/2.8. I went through a lot of lenses thinking they were all soft since I hadn't realized that my camera body actually had focusing issues. I then bought a 24-105 mm f/4L hoping to get sharp images and a not to narrow maximum aperture to no avail. I quickly discovered that the 24-105 mm range was not so great on a APS-C body. I also realized that my camera body was the actual cause of my image sharpness problems since the pictures I took while using live-view were as sharp as I expected. After years of back and forth with Canon's technical support, I struck a deal to buy a 5D Mk IV at slightly reduced price for all the trouble I had lived with for years. I though my focusing troubles were over. I was wrong. Over the years, I have bought a pretty good lineup of EF lenses (6), a teleconverter from Canon and one Tamron. I also have numerous Canon flashes and accessories. To this day, I still have focusing problems even with what I consider to be pretty much high-end gear, namely a 5D Mk IV and 70-200 mm f/2.8 IS USM II. I still get sharper images using live-view despite having fiddled with micro-focus adjustments to the limit of my sanity. I wondered if all my EF glass would work well on RF bodies. Given that I only like to shoot with the viewfinder, I figured that the R5 with it's higher resolution viewfinder is probably the best option for me. However, it just too expensive. I don't want to replace all my lenses because that would mean loosing lots of money. Honestly, I'm starting to wonder if I should switch camera system even if it means replacing nearly all my gear.
I'm shocked to hear you had issues with the 5D Mark 4 and the epic 70-200 f2.8. You know if you send the lens and camera together for routine maintenance they'll focus align the two together insuring you have a properly calibrated AF system. That way you know those two should be perfect. My 5D Mark IV\1DX Marc II is now a backup camera since I'm all R5 and R3 now with all RF glass. But at one point in time i was pulling my hair out with images not so sharp coming from my EF and DSLR's. I purchased all the software to align them up and everything and after becoming part of the CPS member getting that free camera check and alignment I did that for a few and found my sensor was off and my focus mirror or whatever on the 1DX was going bad. After those two fixes everything was spot on. Might be worth paying for CPS and give a few lenses and camera a real cleaning and calibration with lens attached so you know for sure. FYI The two issues i had never really showed up on my purchased focusing tools hence micro changes didn't help.
Had a similar problem with my 1st Rebel cam. It was front focusing on the viewfinder. It was ok on the LCD. Canon fixed it by using their proprietary software calibration as per tech.
So, I like you tried the R7 and sent it back. Now, I have an R6, and I got the R7 to serve as a backup and as a wildlife camera. And performance-wise, it was very good, though the images weren't as clean as those from my R6. But I came to ask myself was it worth spending a couple grand on a backup camera. Like you, I also came to realize the lens issue. It is frustrating that Canon seemed to just adapt the M-mount kit lenses to use on this new line rather than coming up with appropriate glass. These lenses offer middling quality, which is why the M series failed. So, yes, I could use my RF glass, but then I am compromising that due to the APSC sensor limitations, and I would get no savings on weight, since the R7 is not that much lighter than the R6.
It's less than twice the price of a teleconverter and comes with a battery. The lack of glass is a real bummer with EOS M. Don't start me on the 32 f1.4 not being stabilised. The R7 needs good quality fast glass, otherwise they should have kept with the M series. I've got a R6, but it gets heavy and bulky when I travel.
i see your points indeed. i got the r7 for filming motorcycle stunts in 4k60 and some photo on the side. 3 month and 20k+ photos later im deep in the rabbit hole. got a used ef 70-200 II f/2.8 and a used rf15-35 f/2.8 and both are great. had the rf35 1.8 for a while too which was very sharp and nice bookeh. its tempting to move to a full frame canon body in the future to use this glass. i got both my lenses very cheap but would never buy these at retail for a crop camera, hopefully canon will license third party to make some good aps-c glass. edit: canon must be aware of the situation when they bundle a ef-rf adapter in a budget camera. hopefully ef is not the long term solution
do you find yourself using the cropped 4k 60 or the non cropped? Def. noticeable image quality difference but not sure if the crop is worth the hassle.
Canon’s RF Lenses are IMHO some of the best glass in the game…Period! I own a Canon R5 and adapted EF glass to it. So no problems there. I understand your reasoning for send back the R7 based on the equipment that you already own. Yes the heavier glass on the ASP-C R7 is going to be heavier. However in most use cases this would mostly apply to photography. If you’re shooting video and grading it later them use the kit lens. Like you said in the video. But that’s just me. You also keep pointing out the cost! Yes RF glass is expensive but Canon gave us the ability to adapter EF Lenses. That’s huge. However RF glass is tack sharp, so you get what you pay for. I think the R7 is the full bodied version of the M series of Mirrorless cameras with better autofocus, ibis and video features. But if you’re looking for a walk around camera and are cool with the kit lens or adapting EF or making the leap to RF glass. You can’t miss with Canon. I’ve had Sony as well but Canon is more user friendlier and has better colors. Let me also add again that yeah RF and adapted EF lenses can be expensive but they are investments. And most professional or hobbyists would only need 2 to 4 of them. Again we invest in the glass for the long haul and not necessarily the camera body. In closing you sound as if you’re trying to convince yourself of the reason you’re returning it. You knew upfront about the lens selection and that you were going to adapt EF lenses. Just say that it doesn’t offer you more than your Sony A74 and the glass you’ve invested in.
I've been wanting to upgrade to a more prosumer setup (pro features without having to pay for pro prices) and the R7 and Fuji XT4 are the two bodies I'm currently looking into. You just expressed my exact same problems with Canon's current lens lineup. You can always find work-arounds with adapters or speed boosters but if you want to stick to native lenses and a simple setup that offers you a seamless experience Canon RF and RF-S isn't it right now. The EOS M system had so much potential but it got canceled. The EF-M 32mm 1.4 is an excellent lens. If only the made a few more EF-M primes like an 85mm or a 200mm it would have made EOS M (my current system) worth sticking to. Right now Fujifilm is seriously convinving me to switch brands
Thank you for this. I currently film on a canon m50 an DC I'm looking to upgrade next year. This definitely h err lips since I already have a lot of adapted ef glass I am hoping th o stay with canon. I'll see how the dust settles in the next year.
For me, none of Canon's STM lenses is worth buying. The extending tube / front focus design and the AF motor noise is driving me nuts. Stepper motor's from the 90's. I hope Canon runs out of stock soon.
@@3BMEP oh well for me too, I just switched (still in the process) from Nikon to Sony and I couldn’t be more excited. That A9II got for a steal and also got for a steal a (never used not even once Sony 200-600 lens. That lens is awesome. I really get now how Sony has been getting so much praise. That camera and lens is getting me results. Now there’s some things I don’t like, but for the prices and value it’s mind blowing. I honestly want to try out every camera and lens (more so lenses) in the entire planet if I could? I find myself looking up lenses all day online reading reviews, “optical limits” resolving power, vignetting, distortion, CA affects, flare, overall sharpness, etc etc. then scrolling through OfferUp and eBay to see if I can find them. It’s a little exhausting. The weather sucks where I’m at or else I’d be out shooting some birds or street photography….
I'm not sure what you're really to expect here. Neither Canon, Nikon, nor Sony has fully supported APS-C with professional glass or even much intermediate glass. They're making APS-C bodies for consumer entry-level cameras and for "extra reach" on high-end pro telephoto glass for sports and wildlife. Canon's been the worst, and of course, their APS-C lenses didn't even fit full-frame bodies until EOS R. As you demonstrated, the kit lens isn't terrible, and I don't think anyone's released a truly bad kit lens in recent times, particularly since most mirrorless systems can punt some lens corrections to software, leaving the lens design budget spent on things they really can't fix in software. Overall, you get a better image for the money. Of course you can use any full-frame lens with Canon, Sony, or Nikon APS-C bodies, but you're leaving quality on the street... that body is essentially an optically perfect 1.5x or 1.6x teleconverter. Or, to flip it around, you need a lens designed for a perfectly sharp image on a ~80 megapixel full-frame sensor to really deliver on a Canon R7. Clearly Canon's designing for ~50 megapixel sensors today, but do they have a higher design point? Maybe. It's all ultimately trading off cost, weight, size, and performance. I think this does illustrate a point, however: shop first for your glass. What's your use case? Is size important? Variety of options? A big third party selection? If you want smaller lenses at a high quality, there's Fujifilm, Panasonic, OMDS, or third party. Maybe Pentax, as they were APS-C only for decades, but that's all older glass, too. Back when I shot APS-C on Canon EF/EF-S, wound up going to Sigma for better lenses, even though I had some deep anger against them for their terrible support, including reverse-engineered EF lenses that didn't work on digital bodies (they'd fix mine for slightly more than I had paid... I really did like that 35mm f/2.0, but not that much).
Canon has never taken APS-C serious, their lens selection for EF-S says it all, even Nikon has a more impressive APS-C lens lineup. But then again, I never had to buy 60 different lenses and neither has most people, for 15 years the things I have witnessed is that people and myself included buy one main fast zoom, a complimentary zoom lens usually either super wide or telephoto reach, then if you want even faster lenses you go for 18mm - 50mm or a 100mm prime, but then we have likes of Sigma that makes F1.8 zoom lenses 18-35mm and 50-100mm that essentially covers those needs quite well if you can bare the weight, the idea of the speedboosters and adapters with built in ND filters are quite good actually because it adds the flexibility of a videocamera into the world of MILC, slap on speedbooster with 24-105mm F4 turning it into something like F3 and built in ND filter and decent enough AF thats still better than Panasonic S5 and GH6, yeah its a run and gun dream come true if you like compact setups.
I went with an older EosR as my B cam due to DOF concerns. I needed a second shot for my C200 and the EOSR was the closest option for my budget. I'm not super satisfied but it cuts ok with the Canon Raw 4k shots.
For those of you looking at this camera in 2024, Sigma now makes 3rd party lenses for Canon which was not the case two years ago when this video was made.
Well, i really like the camera ☺️ Specially together with Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. Heavy, yes, but image is really good in my opinion ☺️ Hope we’ll see good quality, fast and more affordable RF-S lenses than the RF counterpart down the road.
Canon aren't going to give you the glass you want. The trajectory of their product line and lens system tells us all we need to know. Anybody who can't or isn't willing to spend on Canon's grossly overpriced glass is going to be left out of it. Harsh but true. I shoot Sony and I'm not a fan of a number of aspects of the system. I do like the big range of often high quality glass.
If you like it, that’s all that matters!
Is there a native RF mount version of Sigma 18-35/1.8 available? Thanks!
@@andreasstesinou3238 nope
@@jdam28k Given that Canon just handed a cease and desist notice to Valtrex its clear the direction Canon is taking.
Great insight. I've been a Canon user since the '90s. I have some L glass that I love. I've always liked their user interface. But I'm finally thinking it's time to go mirrorless, and I'm looking elsewhere. Their recent shenanigans over third-party manufacturers of RF mount lenses helped ease the decision. I may revisit later, but I'm nearing retirement and my next system will likely be my last. (Not like Canon needs me, of course. 😂)
For a few reasons I don't see their restrictions on 3rd party RF lenses as much of a limit. OTOH, if you want to avoid companies that enforce their IP rights you're going to find a lot more limits on what's available to you. What annoys me is other decisions they make that are (presumably) based on the bottom line instead of giving us the best products. The video says the R7 is "the least compromised" but there are lots of compromises. I'm primarily interested in wildlife, so what I was really hoping for was essentially an APS-C version of the R5. They came close, but (especially considering they're already offering the market an inexpensive APS-C with the R10) I'd rather see a $2000 to $2300 price in exchange for a better sensor and processor(s).
What annoys me even more is that somebody made a decision that's probably going to turn out to be a complete deal breaker. My current Canons all have a Canon +2 viewfinder correction lens that gives me much more than the extra +0.5 correction I need in addition the built-in -3 to +2 correction in order to use the camera without my glasses, but it looks like they've discontinued all of those correction lenses. There's no way I'm spending even $500 for a camera that only offers a blurry viewfinder if there's an alternative, so that's the reason I'm also looking at moving to one of their competitors.
@@suedenim9208 I have been a Canon user since the EF system was available in the 1986 and am nearing retirement. I never switched to the RF system because of my investment in EF. This crippling of the R7 by removing the diopter correction for the viewfinder means I'm completely staying away from Canon for good.
I needed a smaller high megapixel system for landscape and have opted for the 40 mp Fuji's with the fixed fast primes. I'll stick to my Pentax K-1 for other types of landscapes and my Canon 7DMkII with 100-400 with 1.4 extender for wildlife and my 6D/5DMkII w 135F2 for portraits.
I use a Canon R6 as my main camera and the R7 is my supplement especially for small wildlife photography. I’m not a pro, but I am happy for my cameras. I only use Canons PRO lenses, eg. 100-500 mm as an example. That lens gives me 800mm equivalent on the R7.
Now finding out that other manufacturers are forced to quit producing RF lenses… no sigma trio (16, 30, 56mm) for this one. No tamron, no viltrox, no samyang… in my mind the r7 was going to be the best budget camera of the past years and in the last week it has become the most likely to fail. Sorry canon, tried to love you but you keep making it hard to.
I'm shooting birds and I'm lucky enough to own the RF 600mm f/4. $1,500 to shoot at 960mm at f/4, the R7 was a no brainer, for me.
I pre-ordered r7 and after waiting for over a month I heard about two new RF lenses for about $800 that are not as compelling as sigma art 24-70 f2.8. I canceled my order. I am upset with Canon lineup and prices. I think I will go for Sony full frame and sigma lens.
The fact that Canon is now also restricting 3rd party producers from producing RF lenses is ridiculous.
They are now approving some third party on a case by case basis. They just don't want a bunch of junk out there and people blaming their cameras for poor results.
What I heard you can't blame canon so much, because Nikon and Sony locked their mounts for a few years as well. They will probably open it.
Here we are a year later and still, there's absolutely nothing new here. It's all "deja vu". Unfortunately Canon did the same with its EF-S & completely lost it with its E-FM cropped system. Canon missed the boat and actually crippled the M system from day one.
I don't believe they're will be many new RF-S lenses released in the foreseeable future. Canon want you to use expensive FF lenses on your APS-C body if you're after the best. Personally I'm happy to use my RP as my main camera, I only use my R7 when I need the extra reach using my RF lenses even though the R7 beats the RP in most other areas. Having said that, I've just invested in the EOS M2 to experiment with the Magic Lantern software and see what the fuss is all about.
I don’t understand. Your arguments make sense for the every day person that does not do this for a living. You appear to be a professional - making money off this. If you do, why did you ignore the rf 24-70 2.0. Rent it, join CPS, buy it and write off the expenditure?
Everything full frame 35mm is going to be big and heavy if you want speed and quality even third party especially so for any kind of zoom.
Honestly from a professional pov this sounds more like you trying to talk yourself into going micro 4/3. I mean what if you guys decide to get into cine cameras like the c300? Those things ain’t exactly tiny or light.
Rf glass is pricey that I will give you but mirrorless had made finicky ef lenses into modern killer glass. My 85mm 1.2 focused like shit on my 6d for the last 10 years and no amount of adjustments from canon or myself with software ever made it work like it should. I had to mostly manual focus. Moving to mirrorless? Still slow as hell to focus but accurate every time due to focusing on the sensor and not a mirrorbox.
One day I may invest in RF glass, but just as micro 4/3 cameras with adapters made Olympus and Pentax users cheer with joy as they were able to adapt killer old manual focus lenses from practically anyone pre 1980, mirrorless has breathed new life into my lens collection - some over 25 years old like my 300mm 2.8 non is - and I feel no need to delve into RF right now. That will come in time.
I think the R7 couples great with the 100-400mm lens, for shooting semi-macro of small animals.
Is anyone a photographer today? Seems like everything is about picking cameras apart. I wonder how Ansel Adams achieved the quality of work he did with a camera he had no reviews on UA-cam to watch? I personally find the R7 an excellent wildlife camera... Get real people.....
depends what you are shooting. For sports and wildlife photographers, the R7 is a keeper - giving more reach than any FF camera can ever hope to do. We're already using heavy super telephoto lenses, so we're not gonna whine about a bit of weight. Most of us will be using EF glass with an adaptor, because the RF versions are well, vastly overpriced.
@@351linzdoctor yeah sure, at like 8mp (vs 32 mp on the R7).
@@351linzdoctor interesting. What is Sony doing that Canon says FU then - crop mode on say, the R5 (45mp) is like 12 mp...it's obviously less for the R6 etc...I guess it's another instance of the Canon CrippleHammer™
@@351linzdoctor it's actually 17mp on the R5, and 8mp on the R6 from memory. But even then, 17mp vs 32 mp is a big loss in resolution imho. If you are shooting in reasonably good light, then the high ISO performance of the R7 doesn't really matter. From memory (I am no expert on Sony cameras) the A9 etc are far more expensive than a R5. And their animal eye detect AF is inferior too. This is also important for birding and wildlife photography, more so than high ISO imho, especially with the availability of PP software such as DXO Pure RAW 2 and Topaz Denoise AI. Noise on my ancient 60D (what I am using atm) cleans up very nicely up to ISO 2000 and that's probably a stop worse than the 7D II which I've just purchased but haven't had a chance to use yet duet work and weather.
I'm a wildlife/bird photog and a Nikon user... (currently a Z6ii) I almost pre-ordered an R7 for the 1.6 crop AND Canon's superior AF tracking. I just can't justify changing brands for a better AF system but I do hope Nikon answers with a mirrorless replacement for the venerable D500.
Lots of videos against Canon R7 but how come is out of stock and backorder everywhere 🤔
if its out of stock then surely its doing "bad". i got one and actually like it.
You focused (pardon the sorta pun) on a valid issue with Canon - the limited array of lens options. I am a long term (four decades) Canon user, mostly cuz I understand the menus and the system and the menu of futz work-arounds ... oh, and the investment in EF glass (I have an RF adapter). But, when I upgraded to an R5, I thought for sure it would be followed by a cavalcade of Canon and 3rd party lens. This has not really happened. 🙁
I also have a Canon M6 Mk2 which is my lightweight/compact backup system. I suspect this camera has the same sensor as the R7. For the size/weight/profile, the M6 Mk2 system works well [though I have always been somewhat disappointed with the color depth] ... And then Canon constructively abandoned the system/mount - once again strangling the lens array options. The M mount had some promise for smaller lighter weight lens systems. But, I posit, this also may have penciled out for smaller lighter weight profit margins. So ... the sensor got stuck into the R7 system.
Hah, Ed!
I’m using the r7 successfully for event multimedia work as a B cam to the r5. I’m using adapted Ef 17-55 f2.8 and tokina’s 11-16 2.8 lenses with a VND adapter. I believe it works great for many scenarios but the lenses need to catch up.
just use RF lens or just get an adaptor from EF
Hey, I'm planning to get R7 as a B cam to my R6. Filming events, weddings. Would you recommend R7 8 after using it? Thanks!
I don't understand the obsession over size and weight. The difference is minimal between full frame mirrorless cameras once you attach the lens and I find that many Mirrorless lenses are massive compared to their dslr counterparts just look at the 1.8 nikon f vs z lenses.
That's because the Z glass is some of the best stuff Nikon has ever produced.... Lots of elements means big (but amazing) lenses.
I don't understand why stay in the past with a freaking mirror in a camera when technology allows for smaller and lighter cameras. I don't think Sony's E lenses are larger than DSLR counterparts. Also, the weight and size difference makes a big difference for hikers.
After watching this video, I am more than happy to keep my R7, while some people complain for hours online, we, photographers, are actually ... taking photos, great photos, the R7 is a great camera, best you can buy for the price, IMO.
Enjoy!
Someone having an opinion or experience which differs from your own doesn't somehow make them less of a "photographer" than you. That kind of twisted logic is part of what poisons this form of art/hobby.
OK "We photographers", if you are good as you say, just stick with a cell phone, they take amazing pictures too.
@Pablo you’re right. Taking photos are what most of the Canon cameras do best. The issue is the people who make UA-cam content about cameras rarely do just photos and these hybrid units are insufficient. But even then, why does anyone choose a crop sensor unit for strictly photography when the RP or R units are full frame for less money? They do wonderful photos but do lack high burst speed and IBIS. I’m not sure why landscape or portrait photographers looking to simply take pictures spend money on anything else honestly.
I tried the X-H2S, and it's the only camera I want at this moment. That could change. A 40mp Fuji is being launched soon in NY. The R7 is great, but the thought of investing in full-frame glass to squeeze the best performance out of it is nauseating.
If The R7 is meant to be a wildlife and sports camera, why isn't it properly weather-sealed? Now that's a great question
The 7d II released at a price that would be $2200 today. They could weather seal it for an extra $700 but it wouldn't sell as well. I'd rather have the extra 700 personally.
Too save money
Why on earth would you want to be photographing wild life in the rain in any case? Terrible light, don’t know what all the fuss is about. The vast majority of keen amateur shooters (and let’s face it, the vast majority that will use it will be amateurs) will never venture out in the rain in any case. I agree with the thrust of the points made here by 3BMaaEP though.
@@philfyphil most wouldn’t want too I agree, but for a few it’s necessary and part of their jobs. Also the weather can change quickly and having gear that you know is up to the challenge makes you feel better
@@luisa9628 And get dust and damp in your lenses and camera? Save in the short term and wreck your equipment
Canon owes it to its customers to open the mount so that they can at least get the sigma trios and the sigma/Tamron zooms, 11-20, 17-70 etc.
Couldn’t say it any better, and I’m a canon shooter.
I think it will open in the end of 2023
I got burned by canon once. First camera was EF-M mount... right before they pulled the plug on it.
I'm wondering if canon is going to do the same thing with RF-S. With a grand total of 2 lenses, they really aren't investing much into this ecosystem.
@@NathanBuildsRobots I'd just go Fuji tbh
@@starnutron6147 Never ever will they open the RF mount for 3rd parties. Not in the foreseeable future. Canon camera = Canon glass.
Yep. I will also wait for something like eos Rii, R6ii or even RPii. R6 needs more mpix sensor!
Not sure why you'd send this back. It's the best cropped camera I've used, ever. And I've used a LOT.
My comment is less about the R7 & more about Canon in general.
I have mentioned in other videos that I Own the R6 & R5. Both are great cameras & are vastly enjoyed to use.
I contemplated picking up the R7 as a 3rd body at weddings etc.
But Canon is annoying me.. There is rumor that there will be yet another price increase on both lenses & bodies.
And.. there is no sign that Sigma & or Tamron will have any authorized RF mounted lenses because Canon will not open up their mount. This annoys me.
I want use of some solid primes without spending $2500+ to get them.
I'm very close to picking up a Sony A74 & Tamron 28-75 G2 to try out the Sony System and see how I like it.
It's not that I don't like the Canon System, but the company is really bothering me. I owe them NO loyalty.
And I'm sick of them not listening to us while companies like Sony & Fuji seem to be giving their customers tons of things to make them happy.
Something like 3rd party lens support allows me to be within a system & make money professionally and then upgrade later instead of being stuck without a lens in the focal length I want till I can spend $2800 on it.
So.. I'll see, if I try Sony and it really fits me & what I need.. I may sell my Canon Gear & go full in on Sony.
#Sony #Canon
2 years latter and the only issue with the R7 is there is no way to add a fully working vertical/battery grip. Everything else is a non-issue. At the price you can get one now, the R7 is a no-brainer.
I love your rather high brow repose. Why drive a Lincoln when you can own a Bentley...... lol.
You give perspectives I have seen no one else give, This video is incredibly valuable!! Thank you !
😊🙏🏻🖖🏻
I shoot mainly sports (with an R6) and I wanted the R7 to be my second body (and an 1.6x teleconverter for my Sigma 120-300/2.8 S) ... but Canon made the button layout completely different from the R6, gave the R7 great speed but a small buffer, no batterygrip... yes, and then the lens choices... so I cancelled my preorder and ordered a Z6II and a Z9. Until the Z9 arrives, I use the R6 and Z6II together, and the layout of the Z6II matches the layout of the R6 better for my needs than the R6 and the R7 (the R7 switches on/off roughly where my R6 changes aperture) do. Crazy world ;o))
Should I go with Nikon Z or Canon r7 or r?
Keep it mind...editing...ff vs crop bodies.
many of us cannot afford 2 camera systems though...as much as Canon's overpriced RF lenses piss me off, and the lack of 3rd party RF glass competition due to Canon stifling competition, I am simply too deeply invested in the Canon ecosystem to change. Now, if someone wants to donate enough money for me to get a Nikon 500mm f4...
How are you finding the Z6ii for wildlife?. I'm at a crossroads to upgrading from a Nikon D7500 to either an R7 Sony A7iv or waiting for Nikon to release a Z6iii
@@anteater74 ... I don´t have any expirience in wildlife photography, sorry.
Hugh. I love your videos. I love someone who speaks in their videos like they wrote a well reasoned, persuasive essay before filming, rather than the typical ‘mumbling through in a self-deprecating, perhaps even self-negating style’
Having said that, some advice: please stop crowing about full-sized HDMI ports in cameras. It’s just not going to happen. Avoid the mistake of looking at only the cable connectors. Look at the size of the port itself. And not just the size of the rectangular opening in the bank of ports on the body. No. Look at the *volume* that a full size HDMI port would eat up inside the camera body. They are HUGE inside an otherwise insanely cramped enclosure.
It’s just not going to happen because to make it so camera manufacturers would have to sacrifice a major point of competition, camera body size. And they’re going to ask themselves, “If we can get the same function out of a smaller connector, why?”
I could see the argument if we were talking dedicated cine cameras like a Red Helium or something where it needs to be bomb-proof for intense daily shooting under the brutal, militaristic conditions of Hollywood. The trade-off of a little size for ruggedness is common. Think laptops ruggedized for oil rig use, pelican cases, and astronaut gear at NASA.
But for the vast majority of us, a full sized HDMI port just doesn’t matter when an adapter or adapting cable can be purchased if necessary. Is the micro-HDMI fragile? You bet! Is it fiddly? Yep. But it’s compact and that matters more than anything.
It won't happen in canon world only! All new Sony cameras have it. The new Fuji cameras have it. And also Panasonic!
I love this analyse but I don’t think its up to date in 2024.
Correct that the R7 is aimed at bird/wildlife photography. It is working alongside with my R5. The R7 with the RF 100-500 is an excellent combo for me covering insects, birds, large animals, and sports.
True but couldn’t you just put your R5 in crop mode at 1.6 crop which is basically an R7?
@@eliaspap8708 youd drop to 17 mp or fewer at that crop on the R5, but, yes, you could
@@eliaspap8708 R7 : 32mp…..R5 in crop mode: 17mp…..
@@aspotterabroad4145 17mp is still pretty good, unless u need to print A2 poster size or bigger? 17mp is perfect I would say. I used and 18 mp EOS 1DX for weddings for about 10 years and never had an issue with 20x30 inch enlargements.
@@unknownKnownunknowns perfect I would say, 17 mp is good file size, you could easily print up to A2 size possibly bigger.
Interesting to hear your frustration. We don't all have unlimited upgrade money, so we are all much more choosy these days.
I have a bag full of EF glass but haven't updated my Canon camera bodies in some time! Meanwhile, Fuji has got better and better; as have phone cameras.
I'm still using my Sl1. I was hoping for a new version of the R10 but that does not look like it is happening this year. The real issue the new iPhone 16Pro will have 90% of the capabilities of the current R10 and it's about 2/3 of the price by the time I buy an R-Series lens for it.
Canon is continuing to prevent third parties from developing the RF platform. Another reason that I continue to use my SL1. They have allowed a couple of token third-party lenses but they are priced a stone's throw from the equivalent Canon lenses so are of no value to budget-minded customers.
While I was considering the r7 I am now putting a hold on this purchase. Canon's decision to issue cease and desist letters to Valtrex and perhaps a larger plan to prevent all third-party manufacturers from creating autofocus lenses for the rf mount means this is no longer an affordable platform for a casual photographer. While professionals have a budget and can justify paying double what a third-party lens is priced at in come cases I simply cannot. Being on a fixed disability income it's simply out of my budget. So for now I will look at using the new iPhone 14 and stick with my sl1 and forgo even the budget option R100 when it comes out. until this is resolved.
if are you in the US, I highly recommend that you formally complain to the US DOJ about Canon's actions being anti-competitive and monopolistic in nature. And keep complaining. And encourage your friends and family to do so to. Sustained pressure will get the US DOJ to investigate Canon.
@@davepastern I am in Canada. The real question is has Viltrox used Canon patented technologu in the contruction and operation of their autofocus lens? If they have they have a legitimate reason to request this acrivity be stopped. But at the same time I think Canon could make a great deal of money licencing the IP to Viltrox for markets they are iot interested in developing or pursuing. If this was done with the intention of stifling competition rather than enforcing legitimate patent ed technology then its anti-competitive. Good luck proving that.
@@PWingert1966 that is the million dollar question. 2 thoughts though:
1. software patents should be banned and made illegal globally - software code is based on maths, and maths is not patentable. A corrupt US government that wanted to protect US software companies like Microsoft, Apple, Oracle etc was more interested in protecting them than actually applying the rule of the law. Software patents promote anti-competitive and monopolistic behaviour and weaken the consumer experience, despite what the big software players would like to tell you.
2. using the RF protocol tech to establish a monopoly via killing the competiton is also, imho, illegal. The question is, will the corrupt US government do something about it, or will Canon buy corrupt US senators to get their way?
@@davepastern If there is money to be made they will enforce the patent. But I think in my case I am just going to not buy a camera for an upgrade to my SL1. My iPhone will vcover most of my photography needs and once I upgrade to the iPhone 14 I won't really need a camera.
Initially, I thought it would be a great 2nd camera for birding to my R5 with its 1.6x crop factor for extended reach and even faster frame rate. But no, the microscopic buffer size killed it for me. I decided to just to keep the R5 for now before I work out later whether I should still stick with Canon.
I’m thinking of going Z8/Z7iii to replace my R5. I’m so done with waiting for a 50 1.4; my 50 1.2 is so heavy it stays at home.
did you try CRAW and feathering the shutter button? Many wildlife/birding photographers have been very happy with the R7's buffer after doing the above.
I’m also waiting for a good b cam to my R5. The R5c battery life makes it a deal breaker for me, and I didn’t like the R7.
The buffer isn't microscopic. I shoot wildlife, mostly action. I am currently working on a project on a falcon nest. Very fast moving. Using the R7 almost exclusively. I have yet to hit the buffer. 51 frames! That's only a few less than my R6. Most fast action is long over before I hit that! That's over 3 seconds at 15fps. That's better than the highly touted ("professional grade") 7dii 24 (as I recall) at 10fps.
To me the canon RF 1.8 primes are not the same quality of the competition. They all have a protruding lens element when it focuses. The lenses are either cheaply made or super expensive. Especially now since canon haa recent halted the 3rd parties that were mfg lenses. I've recently purchased a z30 and love the colors so much going to get the z50. Viltrox lenses make the zed apsc mount viable.
from the looks of the comments...lol... R7 WINS.
It’s a solid camera that serves its purpose and price better than anything else in its class
Jesus….. that was the most depressing yet vitally relevant and informative video I’ve watched on this camera, I was heavily debating purchasing the R7 but than I found out there’s no battery grip there’s no grip extensions and for myself personally there’s not a mirrorless camera that I’ve owned that didn’t have at least a smallrig on it, and there’s a serious lack of exciting glass that’s affordable and not the size of a CFL Spalding J5V football, I want to be excited about Canon I really do but it just doesn’t make sense
As you and many of the people making comments have outlined any camera choice is about “use case” along with price and fit in the hand. If all photogs agreed on gear and brand there would be only one maker and a huge hole in the UA-cam community. Very interesting piece and definitely not for you but for me the R7 is my B cam backup for my R5 at 1/3 the price and for that job I love it. Cheers from NZ 😀
Continue to enjoy!
If you're sending that R7 back you can send it to me! I can't find one in stock anywhere!
Fork Canon. I’ve been pissed since they DELIBERATELY OBSOLETED my complete Canon FD system by making the new EOS bodies THICKER than the old bodies. No infinity focus using old lenses on the newer bodies. SCREW EM.....
What exactly do you mean by "improved manual of arms" at the 3:24 mark?
Great reveiw! Amazing how much sharper the 24-70mm f2.8 L glass is over the 18-150mm lens. Better glass does look better in image quality. I am considering an Canon R vs. Canon R7 as priced similar and the full frame R could be a better buy for photos, and good enough for video is just mainly using HD 1080. Although for 4K video the R7 would be better than video on the cropped 4K of the original R.
Weird how spending 4 times as much actually gets you something, isn't it? What Ii find amazing is how much you get for the price of a lot of the relatively inexpensive lenses that are available.The extra reach of my EF 100-400 II is great, but I've gotten some excellent shots with the EF-S 55-250 kit lens that came with my Rebel. If you can spend the extra for the L lenses they're a good choice, but entry level gets you an awful lot compare to what was available 20 years ago.
@@suedenim9208
Exactly.It’s all down to personal needs and wants - the two often arn’t mutually inclusive.
Nooooooo!!! Why??? I know a lot of people like full frame a lot more than I do. There's one sort of slightly annoying thing about it. Not too bad.
I think I sense a clever conspiracy amongst Canon’s R&D, imaging and marketing teams to maximize profits with built-in guardrails steering us toward full-frame cameras. The new R7 is not a mirrorless 7D, the “affordable” lenses are f8 and f11, and the FF L lenses are EXPENSIVE. But, they may have found the formula that will make them a viable camera company in the long term.
Interesting points!
I totally agree, Hugh. Some people rave about RF lenses but there's almost nothing compelling under $2k. Gotta give Canon credit where it's due though, they're slowly moving the on/off switch closer to where it should be (around the shutter button)!
😉👊🏻
I made essentially the same comment under Polin’s recent 1-year review of the R3. Essentially saying that I didn’t want to spend $1000+ just to get a lens that focused internally and was weather sealed. I was called a fool and told that I wasn’t professional enough for Canon’s L lenses. Fanboys are weird. I actually really considered an R6 too, but the lens selection (not to mention lens price) was a no go.
@@nickolasmazzara127 Since when have you ever been able to buy a weather-sealed, internally zooming, pro lens for under $1000? Never that's when.
What’s the point of the R series cameras with the APS-C when they already have the EOS-M system which is a much smaller form factor and can adapt all of the existing EF and EF-S lenses if you just want to carry around a big heavy APS-C setup.
Canon is wasting time with these junk R cameras. They need to make more large aperture, compact EOS-M lenses for the APS-C sensor format and leave the R cameras full frame.
That's what selfishness get them. Nikkon hasn't felt the pain yet either. Sony Fuji and Panasonic likely the only ones to survive.
Appreciate hearing your views to sanity check my purchase, but the repeated lens choice complaint is half-baked. @ 9:40 thinking this body should only be paired with an RF-S lens is nonsensical. Happy to send you amazing files adapted to the EF 24-70 II or EF 70-200 II, and the AF is seamless for the sports I shoot and superior to its functionality on the 5DIV. Can’t honestly complain about lens cost when a Leica is $8k! And the same adapter works amazingly on the R5
Delighted it works for you! 👍🏻🖖🏻
Canon being selfish with the RF mount will bite them in the arse. We all want SIgma RF.
I bought the R5 14 months ago. 1 month ago I bought the R7. Now I'm selling my R5 for another R7 :) Plain and simply, the R7 is a better small bird combo.
Sir, the light on your right and front has created a nagging and very disturbing reflection on your glasses, causing us to loose vision of your right eye most of the video time😢
I can’t make my mind up between an R7 or a 90D.
Those who have been around in the Canon camp for a while, seem to share the opinion that R7 is not a 7Dii replacement - it is more like an R70 model, if one was using the old DSLR naming convention. It is also no secret that the move to mirrorless design has allowed the manufacturer to reclaim their price dictating powers to recoup from the slump in profits mainly carved out by the mobile phones over the last 5-10 years.
However for hobbyists like me, who own legacy EF glass but leveled off their purchases at 50D and 5Dii, R7 offers a better RF migratory path - in terms of local price/performance ratio - than RP or R6 do at the moment, and the more compelling move away from looking at second hand 5Div and 5DS(R) models. Good video, enjoyable as always.
Thanks for sharing, Mack!
My thoughts exactly. Enjoying my R7 so far but can't decide what lens to buy. Going around in circles!!!
I was thinking of switching from Fuji to Canon recently, I greatly prefer Canon's out of camera color and the better autofocus technology is pretty appealing, I really liked the R7's body. But I immediately dropped the idea after looking at the lens selection. It's extremely uncompelling.
Stay within the warm embrace of Fuji! 😅
@@nightowlnzab I don't think it's possible at this point lol. You basically can't get a better mirrorless APS-C system right now. After I decided that Canon wasn't going to work I'm now waiting to see the XH2 and the XT5 now I *really* want that 40mp sensor.
I'm sticking with Fujifilm for now because of their great range of dedicated native lenses :-)
Don’t forget every EF lens works seamlessly with a $99 ($69 refurb store)canon adapter. I use the EF 70-200 + R7 for field sports and the AF is better than my 5dmkiv with the same lens. More shots in focus. Don’t be swayed into thinking you must buy RF glass. Save way more money and get amazing results. To be honest I wish I had an R5 but it is too much money
@@unknownKnownunknowns That would make a ton of sense if I already had EF glass. If you had the glass already and you're getting better results on the R7 it makes sense why you would do that. But I don't have any EF glass and I find it very concerning that a company refuses to properly support it's own mount and instead relies on adapters. It worries me that Canon won't support it properly ever and that makes it a tough sell to buy into it as a new system. Especially when I have a very strong lens ecosystem and mount support in Fuji it just doesn't make sense to walk away from that to a potentially dead end mount for relatively minor things like color science and autofocus.
Some great point well made Hugh. I have taken the plunge into mirrorless aps-c by getting the Fujifilm X-S10 as Fujifilm currently has the widest range of dedicated aps-c mirrorless lenses to suit most budgets and genres. For example, I recently purchased the tiny Fujifilm XC 35mm F2.0 lens for only £169 (brand new, UK) and it is tack sharp and has lovely colours, contrast and bokeh! I really don't see Canon, Sony or Nikon investing much into their mirrorless aps-c systems going off what they did (or did not) do in the past with DSLR's. Interestingly, the best selling digital cameras in Japan at the moment is still the Canon M50 II (twin lens kit).
Enjoy!
very strange ... its excellent this camera ... a nd for the price the best for buck
Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 art Canon is better than the 24-70 Canon
I am putting a hold on my purchase decision of R6 Mk ii. Great body. Great ergonomics. But I don't like vendor lock in. So no canon for me.
I went to Fuji for similar reasons, Canon's RF lens catalogue is to expensive at the high end and to cheap at the low end, anyone wanting basic mid range lenses 24-70 / 70-200 etc.. is out of luck.
One year later nothing has changed. Canon threatened legal action against third-party lens manufacturers and then bricked the existing lenses and licenced expensive third-party lenses (Three in total) of middling quality and close to Canon's price. So, no I am not replacing my Sl1 with another Canon. I am waiting for the iPhone 16Pro at half the price and offering good enough capability for street photography and video making.
expensive? £479 for the 18-50mm from sigma isnt so bad.
Extremely thankful for making this video. I was going to buy Canon R7 as my very first camera & now I am thinking of going to Sony A6600 for cheaper price and better lens ecosystem.
Canon is making themselves the Apple of Camera industry, excellant product quality, high priced & closed system end to end Canon.
I would recommend trying out the 50mm f/1.8 with R10 or R7 to start out with; I am not certain the comment of lens ecosystem is a accurate comment given there is no price comparison with cost vs quality presented. Yes RF lenses are costlier than EF but from personal experience the quality is blew me away with Canon EF vs Tamron EF vs Canon RF. Sony does have some compelling lenses in G-master series that are in the same price ballpark.
@@ImranMYousuf I believe having a zoom range will give Me all round usage. With Sony I was planning to buy 18-50mm F 2.8 which is a pretty standard zoom range for all usage.
But if I want this same lens for Canon it's equal to the price of Sony A7 IV body 😅. Yes 50mm might be useful for a few months but after that I will have to buy a zoom range.
Also with 50mm and 1.6x crop of Canon I will be getting 80mm which is too tight for streets atleast.
I have a bit of experience on other's cameras shooting at 70mm.
@@avijitchakraborty3944 What you said is correct, for crop sensor as well my fav lens was 50mm (with 60D); later on 35mm and 85mm complemented it and now I almost exclusively use 24-70mm f/2.8 and 100mm f/2.8 macro...but yes you can not go wrong with Sony either.
@@ImranMYousuf ya I mean 18-50mm with 1.5x crop will give 27-80mm at F2.8 which I believe is a great range.
But again do Full Frame & Crop Sensor matter a lot ? What are the ways one can bridge that gap ?
All this is why I didn’t go down the Canon mirrorless route when I could have done. Top quality but stratospherically expensive, huge and heavy red ring lenses, or else pretty middling silver ring ones. No third party alternatives. So I kept my extensive 1DX II / 5D III EF kit for sport and events and paired Leica SL2 with brilliant, relatively inexpensive and lightweight lenses from Sigma and Lumix for everyday use. Plus my M10-R of course. I take it all to Scotland whenever I go ! Leica for slow days, Canon for the Edinburgh Festival and the Braemar Gathering.
Thanks for sharing, Simon!
had r7 as well kept my r6 returned the R7 did not like the high iso at all and the buffer was trash
Been saying the same for a while. The limited lens options really hurt this system. I have an R7 with 18-150mm, a 10-18mm efs, and 24-105 ef. When using the ef glass and adapters people need to be mindful the stabilization benefits are not even close to what you get with rf lenses. That's to be expected but it is very different for video. Also I can't get past the way better lens options I have for my Sony a6600. I still use it at all my weddings. I barely use my r7 yet. I do like the image though
wow...I got chills: I'm in exactly the same position. My film SLRs are no longer practical (yeah, I know, I know, call me stubborn) and I need to go digital not just for photos but for corporate video; the choices are driving me mad with frustration! Sony are as bad as Canon for "little snags!"
Trying to find the perfect balance between cost and practicality is nigh on impossible!
I ordered the R7 and plan to use it with my Sigma 50-100 f1.8, 18-35 f1.8, and will test my older Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 APO EX DC OS HSM with it. I also ordered the 100-400 and 800f11 so we will see.
The RF lens line up does make this tricky and I also don’t like heavy glass. Used to be an M43 guy but my RX100M3, RX100M7, and RX10M4 took over those duties. Unfortunately my kids like to do sports in dungeons so I am back to heavy glass and semi larger sensor.
I would love any insight on the R7 and sigma line up from anyone already using this combo.
Would I be crazy to go with Canon M mount at this point knowing they won't support it much longer? I just want that Sigma trio and M6ii and it looks like I won't be able to get it for an R10 or R7.
Crazy? No: we want what we want - that’s part of being human. But I wouldn’t be inclined to vote with my money for a company whose direction and/or values don’t align with my own.
I was surprised to see the jittery AF performance. I purchased an M50 and an M6 mk2 for a project I was doing. I used EF glass on them, with a viltrox speedbooster, and never experienced the type of problem you've experienced with your R7, which I would have assumed would blow the M series bodies out of the water!
In fact, all DSLRs and MILCs are primarily still photography cameras. That's what I treat them as. I'm never into videos so, couldn't care less about that. Therefore, My old 1DIV, 7D, 5D and 5DII are good enough for a hobbyist like me to keep shooting subjects of my choices everyday.
When I do record few casual videos; my smartphone is good enough to take care of that.
8:52 is Hugh realizing he forgot to hold the thought.
Mostly agree on Canon RF cameras are not good selection, at least at the moment, with the pretty good and complete selection on Nikon Z and Fuji X mount.
If you are saying the lens on Canon RF mount is expensive, Leica lenses are also expensive.
The problem on Canon RF is their lenses image quality, except those f1.2 or 1.4 which are as good as their price tag,
are lag quite far behind behind Nikon Z and Fuji X mount new lenses, not to mention Leica.
You nailed it. Other than users for whom the crop/reach would actually be a benefit, I’m just not seeing the appeal. The RF lens lineup is already sparse for those of us who aren’t made of money, and the RF-S lineup is way, way worse! I’d buy a plain old R or even an RP over the R7, all day long.
He has a tiny bit of Jeff Goldblum vibe 😂
It's been odd to me that Nikon and Canon have invested in APS-C at all after going mirrorless. Their DX and EF-S systems were rich with lens options, back when it seemed to make more sense to stair-step back in the DSLR days from crop to full frame. Though I've never owned one, Nikon's D500 is considered a pro-level camera despite the smaller sensor. With almost no compelling lens options and no real reason to flesh the lineup out, lest they cannibalize sales of the really $$$ R glass, the R7 and R10 just don't make any sense to me.
The same thing has occurred to me when Fujifilm shooters ask for a full-frame camera, ostensibly out of sensor size envy. It makes sense for Fuji to exist in the two realms it has chosen, where the difference is great enough to justify owning both systems if a photographer's needs call for it. But no company these days is pursuing both APS-C and FF systems with equal vigor - Sony occasionally shines here, but it's clear their hearts are really in FF and they're slowly leaving the cropped cameras behind. It stands to reason Canon and Nikon might be attempting it because past marketing decisions in the DSLR era told them it will be successful, but with the camera market so contracted since then it doesn't seem like there will be room for these in-between bodies to survive.
Great points, Chris - nice to see you here!
In all, "upgrade" from APS-C to full frame is a myth. APS-C body with FF lens only makes sense in extreme tele.
many of us wildlife photographers want a mirrorless APS-C for the reach. It's pretty simple really...
I think I may still check out the R7 for video. I have the RF 85 f2 and the 24mm 1.8 IS macro looks pretty cool. That’s a 38mm on the R7, it may just never leave my body lol.
So not good for sports ?? Or just go for the R6ii
Would you prefer the canon r6 Sony a7iv/a7s3 for a video documentary
Sony
Superb review! Many thoughts and facts, just what I needed.
I pre-ordered the r7 aiming to use it with my sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 50-100 f1.8 and canon 17-55mm f/2.8 all work with the adapter excellently with an R5. Since they started action to prevent other lens producers I e cancelled my pre-order and traded the lenses in - time to shift systems!
They only stopped one company from making RF mount glass and that's because they were making garbage. I highly doubt they will do the same with Sigma and Tamron. But you go ahead and switch systems.
This was my thought also. Using the Sigma aps-c lenses. According to a few articles Canon has told more than one manufacturer to stop and why.
Yes, and Nikon need to add more lenses to their DZ range now that they have 3 DX cameras and only 3 or 4 lenses!
Hopefully, Canon is watching the video and reading the comments. Without glass designed for the system, it is basically useless.
The specs are simular to the Canon 90D and I love using my 90D
Damn. I wanted to buy the R7 for sports but I am afraid of the noise the crop sensor might have. I am shooting a R6 right now but I need tighter shots. I have my 70-200 but I really need a 300. Obviously that is an expensive lens. I thought ok I can get tighter with the crop factor but what am I sacrificing? Should I just get the 120-300 2.8 sigma to pair with my R6, which is a $3500 lens or get the R7 body which is around $1200. Decisions.
i think sensors have still come a long way and tbh pairing the R7 with your R6 might not be a bad idea. what you sacrifice, i think is the depth of field. and software these days can denoise.
what have you done in the end?
It does not help that Canon is killing third party lens manufacturers.
No, it makes it worse.
I'll stick with the Sony A7R4 a, for me its just about one of the best all rounders and that huge 60 mp sensor and battery life!
Yes very tough to beat at this point....
There is a reason I’m looking at the Leica CL and the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8. I just can’t find a comparable or compelling camera and lens combo that is this light and has reasonable amount of glass available for it. Also it’s a Leica. I considered the Canon R7, the Nikon Z50, and others, but they don’t give me the desire for them, also the lack of APSC glass isn’t great. If you could please do a video with the Leica CL and the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8, I would love to hear your opinion of it as well as other APSC Sigma L mount lenses.
Sounds like you should check out Fuji my friend. Spoilt for choice with glass and more on the way. The XF 16-55 is an incredible lens. In fact all their lenses are!
@@chrisjames1924 What's going on with all these Christophers on one comment?
I'm with you 100% though Chris J. If anyone's focused on sticking with APS-C, then Fuji's definitely worth a look. And the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 that Chris B referenced is supposed to come to Fuji X sometime in December (news coming from Sigma themselves).
Even though Sony has released some nice crop glass lately, Fuji still gives you a variety of body types, which I like. And "budget" models are often less compromised than with other brands.
@@chrisjames1924 I have, but I don't like how the photos are rendered by the x-trans sensor.
@@ywmedia don't get me wrong, the fujifilm bodies look awesome and the only comparable model for me would be the Fujifilm XE-4, but... there is something about the images that come out of the fuji that I don't like, and I've been looking at a lot of sample photos on Flickr, and I find that I like the output of the Leica CL.
@@christopherbartleson8918 You certainly wouldn't be alone in having issues with the way some of the X-Trans sensors render. I've only ever used Capture One with Fuji so I've not had any of the issues some people had with worming in PS/LR. The earlier X-Trans sensors definitely have a more filmic quality to them. In fact the X-Pro 1 and X100s are probably my 2 favorite Fuji cameras.
To anyone reading this not called Chris, I'm sorry but only Chris's are allowed in this conversation.
Everything you said made perfect sense to me and was pretty much a reflection of my journey with Canon.
I started my DSLR journey with a Rebel XT with the kit lens in 2005. Once I knew what I was doing, I bought a 28 mm f/1.8 and upgraded to a 7D in 2010. As my budget and skill improved, I started wanting faster and better lenses with fixed apertures. That's when I realized that Canon pretty much had a single fast(ish) zoom made for APS-C: the 17-55mm f/2.8. I went through a lot of lenses thinking they were all soft since I hadn't realized that my camera body actually had focusing issues.
I then bought a 24-105 mm f/4L hoping to get sharp images and a not to narrow maximum aperture to no avail. I quickly discovered that the 24-105 mm range was not so great on a APS-C body. I also realized that my camera body was the actual cause of my image sharpness problems since the pictures I took while using live-view were as sharp as I expected.
After years of back and forth with Canon's technical support, I struck a deal to buy a 5D Mk IV at slightly reduced price for all the trouble I had lived with for years. I though my focusing troubles were over. I was wrong.
Over the years, I have bought a pretty good lineup of EF lenses (6), a teleconverter from Canon and one Tamron. I also have numerous Canon flashes and accessories. To this day, I still have focusing problems even with what I consider to be pretty much high-end gear, namely a 5D Mk IV and 70-200 mm f/2.8 IS USM II. I still get sharper images using live-view despite having fiddled with micro-focus adjustments to the limit of my sanity.
I wondered if all my EF glass would work well on RF bodies. Given that I only like to shoot with the viewfinder, I figured that the R5 with it's higher resolution viewfinder is probably the best option for me. However, it just too expensive. I don't want to replace all my lenses because that would mean loosing lots of money. Honestly, I'm starting to wonder if I should switch camera system even if it means replacing nearly all my gear.
The key is to NOT replace ALL of your gear: be more selective, and you may come away with better image quality AND a few bucks in your pocket.
I'm shocked to hear you had issues with the 5D Mark 4 and the epic 70-200 f2.8. You know if you send the lens and camera together for routine maintenance they'll focus align the two together insuring you have a properly calibrated AF system. That way you know those two should be perfect. My 5D Mark IV\1DX Marc II is now a backup camera since I'm all R5 and R3 now with all RF glass. But at one point in time i was pulling my hair out with images not so sharp coming from my EF and DSLR's. I purchased all the software to align them up and everything and after becoming part of the CPS member getting that free camera check and alignment I did that for a few and found my sensor was off and my focus mirror or whatever on the 1DX was going bad. After those two fixes everything was spot on. Might be worth paying for CPS and give a few lenses and camera a real cleaning and calibration with lens attached so you know for sure. FYI The two issues i had never really showed up on my purchased focusing tools hence micro changes didn't help.
Had a similar problem with my 1st Rebel cam. It was front focusing on the viewfinder. It was ok on the LCD. Canon fixed it by using their proprietary software calibration as per tech.
So, I like you tried the R7 and sent it back. Now, I have an R6, and I got the R7 to serve as a backup and as a wildlife camera. And performance-wise, it was very good, though the images weren't as clean as those from my R6. But I came to ask myself was it worth spending a couple grand on a backup camera. Like you, I also came to realize the lens issue. It is frustrating that Canon seemed to just adapt the M-mount kit lenses to use on this new line rather than coming up with appropriate glass. These lenses offer middling quality, which is why the M series failed. So, yes, I could use my RF glass, but then I am compromising that due to the APSC sensor limitations, and I would get no savings on weight, since the R7 is not that much lighter than the R6.
It's less than twice the price of a teleconverter and comes with a battery. The lack of glass is a real bummer with EOS M. Don't start me on the 32 f1.4 not being stabilised. The R7 needs good quality fast glass, otherwise they should have kept with the M series. I've got a R6, but it gets heavy and bulky when I travel.
Not to mention, Canon is going after 3rd party lens providers.
Right.
i see your points indeed. i got the r7 for filming motorcycle stunts in 4k60 and some photo on the side. 3 month and 20k+ photos later im deep in the rabbit hole. got a used ef 70-200 II f/2.8 and a used rf15-35 f/2.8 and both are great. had the rf35 1.8 for a while too which was very sharp and nice bookeh. its tempting to move to a full frame canon body in the future to use this glass. i got both my lenses very cheap but would never buy these at retail for a crop camera, hopefully canon will license third party to make some good aps-c glass. edit: canon must be aware of the situation when they bundle a ef-rf adapter in a budget camera. hopefully ef is not the long term solution
do you find yourself using the cropped 4k 60 or the non cropped?
Def. noticeable image quality difference but not sure if the crop is worth the hassle.
Canon’s RF Lenses are IMHO some of the best glass in the game…Period! I own a Canon R5 and adapted EF glass to it. So no problems there. I understand your reasoning for send back the R7 based on the equipment that you already own. Yes the heavier glass on the ASP-C R7 is going to be heavier. However in most use cases this would mostly apply to photography. If you’re shooting video and grading it later them use the kit lens. Like you said in the video. But that’s just me. You also keep pointing out the cost! Yes RF glass is expensive but Canon gave us the ability to adapter EF Lenses. That’s huge. However RF glass is tack sharp, so you get what you pay for. I think the R7 is the full bodied version of the M series of Mirrorless cameras with better autofocus, ibis and video features. But if you’re looking for a walk around camera and are cool with the kit lens or adapting EF or making the leap to RF glass. You can’t miss with Canon. I’ve had Sony as well but Canon is more user friendlier and has better colors. Let me also add again that yeah RF and adapted EF lenses can be expensive but they are investments. And most professional or hobbyists would only need 2 to 4 of them. Again we invest in the glass for the long haul and not necessarily the camera body. In closing you sound as if you’re trying to convince yourself of the reason you’re returning it. You knew upfront about the lens selection and that you were going to adapt EF lenses. Just say that it doesn’t offer you more than your Sony A74 and the glass you’ve invested in.
I've been wanting to upgrade to a more prosumer setup (pro features without having to pay for pro prices) and the R7 and Fuji XT4 are the two bodies I'm currently looking into. You just expressed my exact same problems with Canon's current lens lineup. You can always find work-arounds with adapters or speed boosters but if you want to stick to native lenses and a simple setup that offers you a seamless experience Canon RF and RF-S isn't it right now. The EOS M system had so much potential but it got canceled. The EF-M 32mm 1.4 is an excellent lens. If only the made a few more EF-M primes like an 85mm or a 200mm it would have made EOS M (my current system) worth sticking to. Right now Fujifilm is seriously convinving me to switch brands
Which Fujifilm will be good alternative for R7 ?
Thank you for this. I currently film on a canon m50 an DC I'm looking to upgrade next year. This definitely h err lips since I already have a lot of adapted ef glass I am hoping th o stay with canon. I'll see how the dust settles in the next year.
Would you have considered the RF 24mm IS f1.8? That is coming out tomorrow. $599
I would have, but the timing was off.
For me, none of Canon's STM lenses is worth buying. The extending tube / front focus design and the AF motor noise is driving me nuts. Stepper motor's from the 90's. I hope Canon runs out of stock soon.
Hugh it’s even worse now for Canon lens choices as you are aware I’m sure, due to cutting out 3rd party options at least Viltrox and Samyang.
Yep.
@@3BMEP can’t you talk to your people at Canon in Japan and set them straight? 😛
@@erichramone7812 Sigh. It would be nice if I DID have someone at Canon. Oh well! 😊
@@3BMEP oh well for me too, I just switched (still in the process) from Nikon to Sony and I couldn’t be more excited. That A9II got for a steal and also got for a steal a (never used not even once Sony 200-600 lens. That lens is awesome. I really get now how Sony has been getting so much praise. That camera and lens is getting me results. Now there’s some things I don’t like, but for the prices and value it’s mind blowing. I honestly want to try out every camera and lens (more so lenses) in the entire planet if I could? I find myself looking up lenses all day online reading reviews, “optical limits” resolving power, vignetting, distortion, CA affects, flare, overall sharpness, etc etc. then scrolling through OfferUp and eBay to see if I can find them. It’s a little exhausting. The weather sucks where I’m at or else I’d be out shooting some birds or street photography….
I'm not sure what you're really to expect here. Neither Canon, Nikon, nor Sony has fully supported APS-C with professional glass or even much intermediate glass. They're making APS-C bodies for consumer entry-level cameras and for "extra reach" on high-end pro telephoto glass for sports and wildlife. Canon's been the worst, and of course, their APS-C lenses didn't even fit full-frame bodies until EOS R.
As you demonstrated, the kit lens isn't terrible, and I don't think anyone's released a truly bad kit lens in recent times, particularly since most mirrorless systems can punt some lens corrections to software, leaving the lens design budget spent on things they really can't fix in software. Overall, you get a better image for the money.
Of course you can use any full-frame lens with Canon, Sony, or Nikon APS-C bodies, but you're leaving quality on the street... that body is essentially an optically perfect 1.5x or 1.6x teleconverter. Or, to flip it around, you need a lens designed for a perfectly sharp image on a ~80 megapixel full-frame sensor to really deliver on a Canon R7. Clearly Canon's designing for ~50 megapixel sensors today, but do they have a higher design point? Maybe. It's all ultimately trading off cost, weight, size, and performance.
I think this does illustrate a point, however: shop first for your glass. What's your use case? Is size important? Variety of options? A big third party selection? If you want smaller lenses at a high quality, there's Fujifilm, Panasonic, OMDS, or third party. Maybe Pentax, as they were APS-C only for decades, but that's all older glass, too. Back when I shot APS-C on Canon EF/EF-S, wound up going to Sigma for better lenses, even though I had some deep anger against them for their terrible support, including reverse-engineered EF lenses that didn't work on digital bodies (they'd fix mine for slightly more than I had paid... I really did like that 35mm f/2.0, but not that much).
Canon has never taken APS-C serious, their lens selection for EF-S says it all, even Nikon has a more impressive APS-C lens lineup.
But then again, I never had to buy 60 different lenses and neither has most people, for 15 years the things I have witnessed is that people and myself included buy one main fast zoom, a complimentary zoom lens usually either super wide or telephoto reach, then if you want even faster lenses you go for 18mm - 50mm or a 100mm prime, but then we have likes of Sigma that makes F1.8 zoom lenses 18-35mm and 50-100mm that essentially covers those needs quite well if you can bare the weight, the idea of the speedboosters and adapters with built in ND filters are quite good actually because it adds the flexibility of a videocamera into the world of MILC, slap on speedbooster with 24-105mm F4 turning it into something like F3 and built in ND filter and decent enough AF thats still better than Panasonic S5 and GH6, yeah its a run and gun dream come true if you like compact setups.
I went with an older EosR as my B cam due to DOF concerns. I needed a second shot for my C200 and the EOSR was the closest option for my budget. I'm not super satisfied but it cuts ok with the Canon Raw 4k shots.
Thanks for sharing!