The rolling shutter only happens on electronic shutter, not an issue with mechanical shutter or 1st curtain electronic shutter. 15 fps is still a good offer. So that statement is over dramatized a bit. But sure, that is an issue in video and electronic shutter, but still a very capable camera.
The problem is that in order to avoid shutter shock on IBIS in R7 it is necessary to use ES. Thus rolling shutter is clearly visible in such photos. Using EFCS or Mech. provides not so reliable series shootout, usually a couple of first frames are tack sharp, many followig shots suffer from vibration, unfortunately.
@@Beaver-be8vk it is based on my experience not some reviews, I have used R7 for over 18 months for aviation photography, a lot of panning or slow shutter speed shots, it just didn't work. Thankfully it was my second body, alongside R6 and then R6MK2, which never had that issue in mechanical or EFCS. Sorry, that was my case.
I too have been shooting BIF with the R7 in electronic shutter since it came out. I have had some shots ruined due to the wobbles, definitely an issue, but not as bad as some make it out. Maybe four or five ruined out of a hundred shot. Of course, I'm sure a lot depends on what kind of birds you are shooting. I wouldn't even try hummingbirds! On the other hand, shooting larger, slower moving birds like eagles, herons etc. it hasn't been an issue at all. I've spoiled more images with shutter shock using mechanical. Over all the R7 has been a very reliable camera, once I learned what custom settings to use. The extra "reach" of the APS-C sensor, the 32 megapixels (80mpx full frame equivalent), the compact lightweight size, 30fps, all compensate for the occasional warped photo. Not to say that it can't use improvements. A "stickier" AF would be number one on my list.
Sorry Simon, but it’s a huge error to say that “ for any sort of birder the R7 is a joke”. That’s a huge mistake and there are loads of birders who use the R7 and are really happy with it. The sensor is an old one and that’s the main problem with the camera although it’s perfectly capable of taking excellent pictures but it is sometimes compromised by movement. Two main problems one is the rolling shutter and the other is that the camera can take photos per second at a speed that is too fast for the sensor leading to inaccuracies. The shutter is also a little heavy. All these things can be fixed quite easily and a more up to date shutter would do it.
You're right. It's not a joke. I just felt that 29ms access is just way too slow for that camera. the speed benefits of electronic can't be realized at 29ms, but I failed to draw the distinction.
I use my R7 with electronic first curtain with 15 (!) frames per second and have no issues with the fantastic autofocus or any stupid rolling shutter. The 33 Mp Sensor delivers super sharp images with potenzial to crop in without loss of picture Qualitiy. And that all for 1400.- With the RF 100 - 400 you get reach of 640 mm. The whole lightweight setup for 2000 bucks bucks.
I was going to say the same things. All camera bodies I've used over the past 40 years have quirks. It is a matter of using it long enough to understand the quirks and how to work within those limitations. Understanding strengths and weaknesses is key and that takes more than a couple hours at a "launch event" to understand. Thanks for posting this.
I have the same setup that I use for auto racing. I usually use a shutter speed of 1/125 and lower and have had no issues with the rolling shutter or shutter shock. I used to use a 5DII or 40D with a 100-400 L lens. I certainly don't miss the weight of those combinations.
If a camera works for what you do, it's a good camera. I don't think anybody's intent, including Simon's, is to bash people who bought and like the R7. When it comes to bird photography, for instance, some of the most coveted shots are the ones most sensitive to rolling shutter distortion. One of the professional bird photographers that I (used to) respect got an early R7 and just raved about it in a review. But it was clear, to me at least, that the shots he was showing weren't his usual work. The were heavily culled to shots that wouldn't expose rolling shutter distortion. A lot of bird enthusiasts bought on his recommendation and then spent a lot of time questioning what was wrong with their photography skills. The one thing that Simon didn't really talk about is that a working professional has to continue to shoot, even in rough weather conditions. (That includes wind/sand, and not just rain.) I have a couple of R50's that I've started to enjoy using outside of a YT studio. But those bodies, like the R7, just aren't built for weather. There's a guy in the comments below who mentioned having to have a really expensive repair done on his R7. There's a good chance that was caused by the lack of weather resistance. I think a lot of us are just looking for a really top-end APS-C body that we know Canon could produce. And by top-end, I just mean that it would cover a lot more of the situations we need it for.
The R7 with 100-500 is my go to birding set up. People are obsessed with 30 fps. I use single or 15 fps and get great phots from this kit. The R7 has a better AF than my R5. Its no 7DII Canon could sell boat loads of R7 II kits if it were a true successor to the 7D. It needs a pro body R5 to house the great insides that The R7 almost has.
I own the R7 and I love it. I feel like you made a big mistake saying that this camera is a joke. With electronic first curtain I've taken easily 50k images with no rolling shutter. With electronic mode (30fps) you do see it now and again, and in precapture (electronic only) and it is obvious that some images do in fact have it. The fact is, this is nothing close to how bad people are making it out to be. Since the latest few firmware updates, I have been made even happier, with the Autofocus, eye/bird tracking and more improving quite a big amount. And this comes from someone who isn't even using a Native RF lens. According to sigma, the 150-600C that I have 'isn't all that compatible'. Yet time and time again, the R7 has proved itself, giving me shots I could only have dreamed off on my old 7D mark II, especially when it comes to Low light scenarios. I've taken photos recently at 25600 iso, that are basically pin sharp on the subject. Only the background is grainy. The 33mp sensor is also a great setup too, cause you can crop in quite a lot, considering the already 1.6x crop from the sensor, this gives you a ton of versatility in post... To me Canon has to improve these things, to essentially make it the mirrorless successor to the 7D mark II, that I know a lot of people where hoping for. - Battery Grip Support - More Professional Finish and Possibly Body (More like the R5 Mark II) in terms of layout etc. - Faster Readout speed (the main issue on the camera tbh). - Improved IS and Autofocus - Add the digic Chip (potentially) - Less heavy mechanical shutter - Copy the pre-capture from the R5 mark II - no single file that only DPP can read etc.
It's not a joke. It's ridiculous that the readout speed is 29ms on what is a flagship mirrorless camera, but I should have drawed the distinction between the mechanical and electronic shutter. Its about outcomes after all.
I get where you're going with this list, and it is in theory possible that the R7 mk2 could be an R5 mk2 with an APS-C sensor. But that configuration would be very expensive - essentially the only price difference would the sensor differential. Would people pay $3k-ish for an R7 mk2? Pros; perhaps, but hobbyists with a budget?.. I don't know. We will see in a year or two. Until then - EFCS or bust!
@@ScottBasu Personally if it costs more, but fixes a lot of the issues and stuff that people have issues with, I can see people paying for that. For me if it was nearer £2000 uk rather then £1500 on launch, then I would definitely consider it. I feel like what people are crying out for is more professional level, then what we have currently, so that would justify the cost, they also have other options for the budget end, the r100, r50 and r10 are all great considering what they cost.
Hi Simon, I believe your judgement about the current R7 being unsuited for birding is a bit harsh. Indeed, in ES the rolling shutter is ugly, however in EFCS you don't have these artifacts (at the price of a pretty loud shutter 🙈) MS I would avoid due to shutter shock. But you're right: getting a stacked sensor would be a huge uplift because it makes the ES usable and at the same time the much faster readout speed will cure the AF performance. The R7 didn't have worse AF algorithms than the R5, but the sensor readout reduced how often the AF control loop could run. But until the R7ii arrives, my wife and my colleague are happy birders with the R7 ! After the R5ii depleted my wallet a few weeks ago, I now only picked up a Caruba table tripod for very low shooting: either waterbirds or things like focus stacking of mushrooms. For the same use case my wife picked up a groundpod, but also the original 70-200/2.8 with a $700 discount (it was wise waiting for the Z version to arrive) and a matching lenscoat at 50% off.
A bit harsh true, but I should have been clear on the electronic shutter limitation, but I completely ignored mechanical - something I used to shoot until recently.
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker Indeed, and once you tasted stacked, you only rarely need to go back to MS/EFCS. On the other hand, the classic MS shutter of the R7 is also badly suffering from shutter shock. From my point of view, the best IQ on the R5/R6/R6ii/R7 can be achieved using EFCS where the shock only happens after the image is taken while you avoid the rolling shutter. Unless you're panning planes at 1/30 like another commenter does. But it seems "pros" are a bit scared of EFCS, and I even had to convince our friend Duade Paton to overcome that fear ;-) The thing is, when shooting 1/2000 or shorter AND f4 or wider, then EFCS may show some artifacts in the bokeh. But unless you're enjoying big fat white glass beyond $9k, you likely don't encounter that issue. I never shot that fast with my 100/2.8 macro, and my other glass wasn't bright enough. Only when my wife will get the 70-200/2.8 she'll need to be aware of the EFCS risk .. Anyway, from the comments I note plenty of people do love the current R7, even when it's not perfect. There's also no real competition from either Nikon or Sony. Only Fuji and OM System offer something, maybe better sensor but worse AF, and certainly more expensive and heavier.
You vastly underrate the autofocus of the R7. It is so rare for me to get an out-of-focus shot that I find it astonishing! The readout speed and hence, rolling shutter are terrible, for sure, but the AF is great. I proved it several times in the FB groups. I demonstrated bursts of 65 shots with every shot in focus. I showed it could do bursts of birds flying against plain backgrounds, busy backgrounds and very busy backgrounds. You have to know the camera and the techniques in different scenarios. Canon's QC seems poor. Some have issues and others don't. e.g. Duade Paton had one where the camera alternated focus between a static bird and the background, bird, background, bird, background and so on. Phil Thatch demonstrated his camera had no such issue. He took 3000+ shots in bursts and only had 3 or 4 slightly soft images. My camera has no such issue and neither does my friend's. Shoot mechanical shutter for no rolling shutter issues. 15fps is plenty, I often shoot one shot at a time or 3fps. I'm not a bird photographer but shoot some for fun. People claim the R7 hits the buffer and stops dead, not allowing any more shots. This does not happen to my camera! In EFCS, it pauses for under a second and then continues in splutters and bursts, like the Sony cameras do. In ES it pauses once for about 3 secs and then continues on in splutters and bursts. You once claimed the buffer is small. Shooting at 15fps (cRaw) in ES you get 187 shots (as per Canon's specs). Shooting in EFCS at 15fps (cRaw) I get 330+ shots. Who shoots for 20+ seconds at a time?
The R7 could have been a much better camera than they delivered. It would not have taken much effort to do so. I can understand why people are frustrated waiting for a refresh on this one. I hope they surprise us with a June announcement ;) That buffer needs to clear quickly - they need to threat it as a flagship camera that it is and not just an APS-C camera.
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker I agree with you in this last statement, The R7 should have been a truly flagship! However, I do have to say that must of the times you (as well as other youtubers) are very harsh on this camera. As far as I know you never had it to test it! Yes, I'm sure that your answer will be : "I don't need it cause I do my researches" and maybe, just maybe, you are right but testing gear goes beyond what is being described on a sheet of paper, even beyond of what others say! The statement that the R7 should not even be considered for wild life is nothing but far from truth! I rather prefer to have the R7 (even in low light) than cropping on a image! IMO the R7 is the best companion for any current FF in Canon lineup. Even with it limitations, it blows out of the way any DSLR in Canon lineup (including the 7D mkII) in terms of AF capabilities and accuracy. I was one of the first adopters of this camera here in Canada. Then afer a year and half I moved on to the R6 mkII because I needed that extra low light capability and guess what, I didn't notice much of an improvement in AF accuracy compared with the R7. Actually after having the R6 mkII I realized (even more) how good the R7 was. A small fact, I still notice almost the same inconsistency in terms of AF accuracy, using af continuous mode, with relative big and easy moving targets with my R6 mk II as I did with my R7. With very fast moving subjects, and I'm not talking about birds in flight but jet fighters for instance, I don't get a keeper rate higher that 63-67% using long lenses and yes, I have used higher end lenses like the EF 100-400 mk II.
Worthy update to the 7D Mk II? The current R7 is in a different world to the 7D Mk II. I had one with only 8200 shutter count and battery grip. It was so far behind my R7 I gave it away for free! I'm not kidding. It was terrible in terms of focusing, image quality, dynamic range and ISO performance, compared to the R7.
Yeah. I don’t understand this huge problem with rolling shutter either. I just use electronic first curtain. ZERO rolling shutter and 15 fps is plenty.
You give very wrong information about Canon R7. It's a very capable camera with amazing AF and great sensor and fantastic speed up to 30 fps RAW! I use it mostly with RF 100-400 lens. It's a fantastic combo, so capable and versatile. I shoot with it mostly birds, but also even butterflies and dragonflies! Besides, I try to photograph them in flight and very successfully! I bought this combo 2 years back. For these two years I became finalist or won awards in many top class contests: HIPA2024 (Portfolio), GDT EWPY, NPOTY, BIRDO, CUPOTY, Golden Turtle, Best of Russia, The Most Beautiful Country by the Russian Geographic Society and a number of others. Almost all my winnings photos were captured with this combo Canon R7 + RF 100-400. Almost all the photos are birds or dragonflies, mostly in flight. And I shoot almost all the time with electronic shutter on speeds 15 to 30 fps. So it's absolute nonsense that Canon R7 can't take good photos of birds in flight. On the contrary, it's one if the best tools for bird photography on the market! Why fo you give people so wrong information?
It's very capable, though admittedly my R7 has largely been shelved ever since I added the R6 MKii to my line-up. That's mostly account that I have only 1 telephoto zoom lens 100-500 L series. Obviously can't use that on 2 cameras at the same time. Have gotten amazing shots of raptors, and waterfowl with the R7. Even amazed me with how well it could capture a hummingbird.
I get picture like those you've shown when using the E shutter on my R7. And I only use electronic when I'm in precapture, trying to grab the takeoff of a bird. I typically stay in mechanical for in-flight birds. But yes, that AF struggles a lot. I can see my subject in focus till the moment I hit the shutter, the AF shifts to the background quite often. An R7ii will benefit greatly with the Accelorator chip.
Oh, man, this video is just a beautiful commentary! "Canon thinks of APS-C as something you give to your kids It's something you try out as a hobbyist." That is EXACTLY the right take on what Canon did with the R7. And I know that risks upsetting people who own the R7, but it's a commentary on Canon and not the buyers. It was $1,899 with a kit lens and that's a lot of money for a camera to give to the kids, or for serious amateurs wanting to do bird work - not to mention the people wanting to use it for videography. The point is, with a 26ms readout speed, Canon KNEW it was going to have serious problems with rolling shutter distortion. By producing a large number of bodies, Canon gives themselves a lot of opportunities to recycle technology and then use the cripple hammer to try and segment their lineup. The real question for the R7II is whether they will treat it like a serious APS-C flagship body, or just throw in some recycled features and charge an APS-C flagship price. I guess we'll worry about that in 2026.
I don't know, guys, I'm not sure I agree with either take. The R7 was definitely not intended for kids, with its 2 card slots and 30 FPS? Seriously. Now, the M200, M50, R100, R50 - yes, I do believe those were purpose built for beginners. My take on the R7 - brace yourself - it's basically the 90D in an RF body, with updated FW & HW chipset to match Canon's latest at the time, and "moderately upmarketed" with 2 card slots to appeal to (gulp) professional wildlife photographers needing an RF version of the 7D series. What I'm suggesting is that, yes, they definitely took a serious swing at it, and basically hit a foul ball. And why did that happen? It's all idle speculation - nobody on the outside would ever really know. I most strongly suspect they took the fastest route and reused the 90D sensor, and here we are with the outcome. I also would speculate that possibly nobody within Canon's inner circle are out there chasing hummingbirds and BIF in the back country - and that furthermore, they possibly did NOT realize there was any sort of an issue because their people don't have the same artistic sensitivities & priorities as professional birders do. Well, as we see, perhaps they have heard the voice of the consumer over the years with the R7, and in a year or two, we will probably have an R5 mk2-like R7 mk2 that will solve most all of the noted issues. Just my warbly hip shots in the dark, not truly knowing what happened, but having a try at it in any case.
Had nothing but trouble with it for around a year, so swapped it for an R6mkii and haven’t looked back. Far better autofocus performance. The sensor is just too dense in pixels to perform properly with the chip on there. Good high ISO performance but generally a struggle in low light. I lost a lot of money on the setup, the camera should never have come to market with such awful flaws.
As a 7D and 7D Mark II enthusiastic user, I was disappointed with the R7. As reports came in from very good wildlife photographers about the poor performance with the AF, that was the final blow. One speculation is that the poor AF, despite having Canon's incredible DPAF, is that the slow readout speed might be a major factor impacting AF reliability. I'm not an engineer, but that does make sense to me, given how reliant mirrorless cameras are on their imaging sensor for AF, whereas the main AF module is a separate piece on a DSLR. I think the issue is that Canon "parts binned" their first-gen APSC cameras, just like they did with the first-gen full-frame ones, the R and the RP, both of which used older sensors from DSLR's and both of which couldn't compete well with more developed and refined mirrorless competitors. They fixed that with their second gen full frame R5 and R6, which had new sensors which, while not stacked, had much faster readout speeds and thus less rolling shutter and killer AF systems. And things got better with Gen 2 (R3, R6 Mark II and R8) and better still with their third (R5 Mark II and R1). Now they just need to do the same with their second-gen APSC cameras, with new sensors across the board. The disappointment with the R7 is what led me to choose the R8 in its place and I'm VERY happy with it. That being said, I do love APS-C for wildlife and a really stellar R7 Mark II will find itself in my camera bag for sure! As to Black Friday deals, I got a 16mm f/2.8 ultra-wide angle lens, my first ever lens in this category. Loads of fun for landscapes and architecture shots and I'm having a blast with it! 😁
A faster 33MP sensor and steadier AF system would be great. I dare to dream of a CF Express type B slot, but that can wait. I'm curious about how Canon will price it. With the R5-I being around $2799 they would be wise to hit the $2499 mark if possible. Just my own opinion. Cheers, Simon!
Thanks for your thoughts. The rolling shutter is the biggest issue with the R7. I find the AF mostly acceptable, but I will wait for a few months and market feedback before I will buy the R7 MK2. I have a full frame camera and hardly use it. APSc is a much better fit for my use cases and wallet.
I get great results with efcs. Bit unfair to say it's no good for birding. As for joke, definitely not. Pick the camera up, learn to shoot with it, figure out its strengths and weakness and like all cameras you will get results. Give it more time Simon and I am sure you will also get results 👍
Shoot in EFCS and don’t worry about rolling shutter. AF is very good especially for a $1,500 camera if you know how to use it. Not being able to take great BIF shots is laughable. The “joke” in this review isn’t the camera.
I've just had my R7 returned after a £540 repair bill for a main pcb replacement after it failed to switch on to be told that basically that's mirrorless bodies for you and they're just more fragile than dslr bodies. I've used Canon gear for 0ver 40 years and thankfully I still own my EF glass and my 2 x 7d mk2 bodies, knowing what I know now I wished I'd have realised that mirrorless cameras are basically more video orientated before investing well into 5 figures on the mirrorless system. Great content and I hope that if the R7mk2 does come to fruition that it's certainly more capable and not so flimsy in build.
I don't think that mirrorless bodies are inherently more fragile. They shouldn't be, since moving a mirror is a major chance for mechanical failure. I think Simon nailed it with the comment about Canon's attitude toward APS-C bodies, and full frame being for "serious" photographers. I've said before on this channel, the thing I'll be looking for first with the R7ii is weather sealing. I'm sure they will upgrade the technology. I'm looking for a sign that they will make it robust enough for serious work in the field. Just so I don't give the wrong impression, I really feel the pain of your big repair bill. It's pretty much impossible not to look at those unexpected expenses as money you could have spent on something like a new lens.
@scotthime6928 the repair bill is the repair bill, I've made my peace with that. It was a get it repaired or bin it situation so in that respect a no brainer. I would like a modern, well built , weather sealed camera. More than happy to pay a premium price for decent kit. It would appear that the photographic side of camera manufacture recently has been totally disregarded for video capabilities and most certainly the decreased life span of hardware. Thanks for your thoughts. 👍
i was excited when the R7 was announced but not when it arrived, its why i stuck with the M50, still provides excellent results with 400-600mm wildlife, i thought i'd wait for either the R7II or the price of the R5 to drop.
R7 is a great camera as is…..use first curtain or mechanical shutter. So many top bird photographers are using it even if they left it with no updates it’s fine.
I’ve never preordered anything. If they gave us this race car version of the R7 for bird photography, I would sell a kidney and preorder it. Pairing that with the RF100-500 would be my dream set up. Working weight of my gear will always be a consideration for me. THIS set up would make me stop watching Nikon reviews.
The EOS 7D II body was fantastic, with a less than ideal sensor. Hopefully, Canon will get the R7 II body right this time (R6 II like body} with a decent stacked sensor.
Thank you for the beautiful video. I totally agree with what you say, I have always had two cameras, one with an APS-C sensor and the other with a full frame. I used Nikon for years, but as soon as I tried the Canon R7 I traded in my Z8 and Z50 and bought both the Canon R7 and the R5, changing the entire set of lenses. The switch from one brand to the other cost me a lot, but it was necessary because Nikon did not have (and still does not have) a camera with an APS-C sensor up to par. Manufacturers are wrong if they only think about improving the performance of "Full Frame" sensors. If Nikon had had a Z50 with at least a stabilized sensor, I would not have sold off my cameras to switch to Canon. This does not mean that I judge my current EOS R5 (Mark 1) better than the Z8. It means that for those like me who can use the same professional (and expensive) lenses for full frame, but who also have fun with the aps-c format are forced to turn to the brand that overall manages to offer the best even with the Apsc format. I feel sorry for Nikon, but the money goes where passion and fun take them. (sorry for the bad English)
Love / hate my R7's :) lol I know most folks are most concerned about "rolling shutter..... which is a problem for me sometimes, although I don't care to do, or view, a lot of BIF shooting. Sometimes Hummers in Hover. JMPO, about 5% of birds on the planet look better in flight, but for myself, they still need to be sharp, good exposure, great color, eye contact, and NOT on a blue sky BG. If I were more into BIF, I'd have probably kept my R5. Anyway, to me where the R7 needs a lot of improvement, is with the AF and EAF. Just not very consistent / sticky. And its not "only" about needing good light or contrast. I've had it just get completely lost under fantastic lighting conditions. Also, I've gotten about as used to "No battery grip" as I'm going to get, and it still bugs me. Come on Canon, rip us off with an over priced OEM grip :) lol {you can't tell I'm still bitter about having to buy that over priced grip for my R5..... which failed 6 months later, can you ?} I will say, I use the R7 > because I pretty much have to. But I think a LOT of folks who buy the R7, bought the wrong camera. I think it's kind of a niche camera, that just happens to fit my needs the best.... But leaves me with lots of issues that need to be worked around.
When the R7 and R10 came out I wanted to buy the R7. But after I’ve heard about the slow readout, the consistent problems with the AF and more minor issues. I instead grabbed the R10, I know it’s even worse but since it was half the price of the R7 and actually available unlike the R7. I hoped that we would get a successor pretty soon. Well we still don’t have on (yet) and on Black Friday I got a R5 mark II and even got a 5% discount. When the R7 mark II comes out I might consider it as a second/specialized camera. Although my second camera will probably become the R6 mark III.
So glad were talking about readout speed. Which is very important Cannon R7 is 32 to 29 ms Sony a6700 26 to 23 ms I hope sony comes with a newer a7000 to blow away this camera. Maybe a better BSI CMOS or even a GLOBAL sensor! Awesome video as always
Canon needs a good APSC kit lens and treats R10 as a baby R7 - otherwise leave the R10 concept. R50 should be for beginners and R10 must be for wildlife beginners with the same sensor of R7 but R10 may not have IBIS and a big battery.
I passed on the R7 bc it felt like too big of a downgrade while switching back and fourth with my R5... I want an R7 MKII to feel like and R5 MKII with a APS-c sensor. I want a battery grip this time too.
What about the global shutter canon still is working on. It would be easier and less expensive to put it an ASPC camera first IF it’s something that could be ready by 2026
Hi Simon …a bit off post…I finally got r5ii … got a problem with card lexar 128GB type b… out of r3…I formatted in r5ii…take a few shots and randomly tells me card full… I remove card put it back and sometimes it is ok sometimes not or sometimes I have to format card again … any ideas ?…is it fault of camera? Thanks
It's a $1500 camera. It's deeply flawed and to turn it into something worthwhile will bring it to $2500+. I dumped it after a week. Those that love it are under the assumption that the camera is more important to get reach than the focal length of the lens. Bird photography isn't cheap. A mediocre at best performing crop sensor is no substitute for proper glass
The proud heritage of the Canon "7-series" has been depleted. Canon wasted valuable goodwill in the bird photography community with the R7. I'm not sure they'll ever get that back.
I do disagree with you on one point about the R7, Simon. You said no serious birder would be caught dead with it. Disagree. Yes you cannot use it for action or flight bird photography, but with its equivalent 80MP sensor and crop factor it's a brilliant bird stills body. 80MP, 1300mm equivalent 200-800 and the light weight associated with both lens and body and it's a dream to use for that scenario
The rolling shutter is a problem, but to state that it is impossible to get good results is vastly exaggerated
The rolling shutter only happens on electronic shutter, not an issue with mechanical shutter or 1st curtain electronic shutter. 15 fps is still a good offer. So that statement is over dramatized a bit.
But sure, that is an issue in video and electronic shutter, but still a very capable camera.
The problem is that in order to avoid shutter shock on IBIS in R7 it is necessary to use ES. Thus rolling shutter is clearly visible in such photos. Using EFCS or Mech. provides not so reliable series shootout, usually a couple of first frames are tack sharp, many followig shots suffer from vibration, unfortunately.
@@KennethMichaels-op5teyou watch too many reviews. It’s not an issue. If it was every shot would be blurred. I get 60-70% sharp shots
@@Beaver-be8vk it is based on my experience not some reviews, I have used R7 for over 18 months for aviation photography, a lot of panning or slow shutter speed shots, it just didn't work. Thankfully it was my second body, alongside R6 and then R6MK2, which never had that issue in mechanical or EFCS. Sorry, that was my case.
I too have been shooting BIF with the R7 in electronic shutter since it came out. I have had some shots ruined due to the wobbles, definitely an issue, but not as bad as some make it out. Maybe four or five ruined out of a hundred shot. Of course, I'm sure a lot depends on what kind of birds you are shooting. I wouldn't even try hummingbirds! On the other hand, shooting larger, slower moving birds like eagles, herons etc. it hasn't been an issue at all. I've spoiled more images with shutter shock using mechanical. Over all the R7 has been a very reliable camera, once I learned what custom settings to use. The extra "reach" of the APS-C sensor, the 32 megapixels (80mpx full frame equivalent), the compact lightweight size, 30fps, all compensate for the occasional warped photo. Not to say that it can't use improvements. A "stickier" AF would be number one on my list.
Sorry Simon, but it’s a huge error to say that “ for any sort of birder the R7 is a joke”. That’s a huge mistake and there are loads of birders who use the R7 and are really happy with it. The sensor is an old one and that’s the main problem with the camera although it’s perfectly capable of taking excellent pictures but it is sometimes compromised by movement. Two main problems one is the rolling shutter and the other is that the camera can take photos per second at a speed that is too fast for the sensor leading to inaccuracies. The shutter is also a little heavy. All these things can be fixed quite easily and a more up to date shutter would do it.
You're right. It's not a joke. I just felt that 29ms access is just way too slow for that camera. the speed benefits of electronic can't be realized at 29ms, but I failed to draw the distinction.
I use my R7 with electronic first curtain with 15 (!) frames per second and have no issues with the fantastic autofocus or any stupid rolling shutter. The 33 Mp Sensor delivers super sharp images with potenzial to crop in without loss of picture Qualitiy. And that all for 1400.-
With the RF 100 - 400 you get reach of 640 mm. The whole lightweight setup for 2000 bucks bucks.
I was going to say the same things. All camera bodies I've used over the past 40 years have quirks. It is a matter of using it long enough to understand the quirks and how to work within those limitations. Understanding strengths and weaknesses is key and that takes more than a couple hours at a "launch event" to understand. Thanks for posting this.
Same. I've shot basketball games with it and no issues.
I have the same setup that I use for auto racing. I usually use a shutter speed of 1/125 and lower and have had no issues with the rolling shutter or shutter shock. I used to use a 5DII or 40D with a 100-400 L lens. I certainly don't miss the weight of those combinations.
The R7 is insanely good, I think youtube has soured this camera too much
If a camera works for what you do, it's a good camera. I don't think anybody's intent, including Simon's, is to bash people who bought and like the R7. When it comes to bird photography, for instance, some of the most coveted shots are the ones most sensitive to rolling shutter distortion.
One of the professional bird photographers that I (used to) respect got an early R7 and just raved about it in a review. But it was clear, to me at least, that the shots he was showing weren't his usual work. The were heavily culled to shots that wouldn't expose rolling shutter distortion. A lot of bird enthusiasts bought on his recommendation and then spent a lot of time questioning what was wrong with their photography skills.
The one thing that Simon didn't really talk about is that a working professional has to continue to shoot, even in rough weather conditions. (That includes wind/sand, and not just rain.) I have a couple of R50's that I've started to enjoy using outside of a YT studio. But those bodies, like the R7, just aren't built for weather. There's a guy in the comments below who mentioned having to have a really expensive repair done on his R7. There's a good chance that was caused by the lack of weather resistance.
I think a lot of us are just looking for a really top-end APS-C body that we know Canon could produce. And by top-end, I just mean that it would cover a lot more of the situations we need it for.
The R7 with 100-500 is my go to birding set up. People are obsessed with 30 fps. I use single or 15 fps and get great phots from this kit. The R7 has a better AF than my R5. Its no 7DII Canon could sell boat loads of R7 II kits if it were a true successor to the 7D. It needs a pro body R5 to house the great insides that The R7 almost has.
I own the R7 and I love it. I feel like you made a big mistake saying that this camera is a joke. With electronic first curtain I've taken easily 50k images with no rolling shutter. With electronic mode (30fps) you do see it now and again, and in precapture (electronic only) and it is obvious that some images do in fact have it. The fact is, this is nothing close to how bad people are making it out to be. Since the latest few firmware updates, I have been made even happier, with the Autofocus, eye/bird tracking and more improving quite a big amount. And this comes from someone who isn't even using a Native RF lens. According to sigma, the 150-600C that I have 'isn't all that compatible'. Yet time and time again, the R7 has proved itself, giving me shots I could only have dreamed off on my old 7D mark II, especially when it comes to Low light scenarios. I've taken photos recently at 25600 iso, that are basically pin sharp on the subject. Only the background is grainy. The 33mp sensor is also a great setup too, cause you can crop in quite a lot, considering the already 1.6x crop from the sensor, this gives you a ton of versatility in post...
To me Canon has to improve these things, to essentially make it the mirrorless successor to the 7D mark II, that I know a lot of people where hoping for.
- Battery Grip Support
- More Professional Finish and Possibly Body (More like the R5 Mark II) in terms of layout etc.
- Faster Readout speed (the main issue on the camera tbh).
- Improved IS and Autofocus
- Add the digic Chip (potentially)
- Less heavy mechanical shutter
- Copy the pre-capture from the R5 mark II - no single file that only DPP can read etc.
It's not a joke. It's ridiculous that the readout speed is 29ms on what is a flagship mirrorless camera, but I should have drawed the distinction between the mechanical and electronic shutter. Its about outcomes after all.
I get where you're going with this list, and it is in theory possible that the R7 mk2 could be an R5 mk2 with an APS-C sensor. But that configuration would be very expensive - essentially the only price difference would the sensor differential. Would people pay $3k-ish for an R7 mk2? Pros; perhaps, but hobbyists with a budget?.. I don't know. We will see in a year or two. Until then - EFCS or bust!
@@ScottBasu Personally if it costs more, but fixes a lot of the issues and stuff that people have issues with, I can see people paying for that. For me if it was nearer £2000 uk rather then £1500 on launch, then I would definitely consider it. I feel like what people are crying out for is more professional level, then what we have currently, so that would justify the cost, they also have other options for the budget end, the r100, r50 and r10 are all great considering what they cost.
Hi Simon, I believe your judgement about the current R7 being unsuited for birding is a bit harsh. Indeed, in ES the rolling shutter is ugly, however in EFCS you don't have these artifacts (at the price of a pretty loud shutter 🙈) MS I would avoid due to shutter shock. But you're right: getting a stacked sensor would be a huge uplift because it makes the ES usable and at the same time the much faster readout speed will cure the AF performance. The R7 didn't have worse AF algorithms than the R5, but the sensor readout reduced how often the AF control loop could run.
But until the R7ii arrives, my wife and my colleague are happy birders with the R7 !
After the R5ii depleted my wallet a few weeks ago, I now only picked up a Caruba table tripod for very low shooting: either waterbirds or things like focus stacking of mushrooms. For the same use case my wife picked up a groundpod, but also the original 70-200/2.8 with a $700 discount (it was wise waiting for the Z version to arrive) and a matching lenscoat at 50% off.
A bit harsh true, but I should have been clear on the electronic shutter limitation, but I completely ignored mechanical - something I used to shoot until recently.
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker Indeed, and once you tasted stacked, you only rarely need to go back to MS/EFCS.
On the other hand, the classic MS shutter of the R7 is also badly suffering from shutter shock.
From my point of view, the best IQ on the R5/R6/R6ii/R7 can be achieved using EFCS where the shock only happens after the image is taken while you avoid the rolling shutter. Unless you're panning planes at 1/30 like another commenter does.
But it seems "pros" are a bit scared of EFCS, and I even had to convince our friend Duade Paton to overcome that fear ;-) The thing is, when shooting 1/2000 or shorter AND f4 or wider, then EFCS may show some artifacts in the bokeh. But unless you're enjoying big fat white glass beyond $9k, you likely don't encounter that issue.
I never shot that fast with my 100/2.8 macro, and my other glass wasn't bright enough. Only when my wife will get the 70-200/2.8 she'll need to be aware of the EFCS risk ..
Anyway, from the comments I note plenty of people do love the current R7, even when it's not perfect. There's also no real competition from either Nikon or Sony. Only Fuji and OM System offer something, maybe better sensor but worse AF, and certainly more expensive and heavier.
Additionally, the R7II MUST HAVE a battery grip!
The rumoured Nikon Z90 may be another higher end APS-C alternative coming before too long.
I'll keep my eyes on that one too.
Don't hold your breath on a z90. Nikon isn't Cannibalizing sales of the Z9 and Z8.
You vastly underrate the autofocus of the R7. It is so rare for me to get an out-of-focus shot that I find it astonishing! The readout speed and hence, rolling shutter are terrible, for sure, but the AF is great. I proved it several times in the FB groups. I demonstrated bursts of 65 shots with every shot in focus. I showed it could do bursts of birds flying against plain backgrounds, busy backgrounds and very busy backgrounds. You have to know the camera and the techniques in different scenarios.
Canon's QC seems poor. Some have issues and others don't. e.g. Duade Paton had one where the camera alternated focus between a static bird and the background, bird, background, bird, background and so on. Phil Thatch demonstrated his camera had no such issue. He took 3000+ shots in bursts and only had 3 or 4 slightly soft images. My camera has no such issue and neither does my friend's.
Shoot mechanical shutter for no rolling shutter issues. 15fps is plenty, I often shoot one shot at a time or 3fps. I'm not a bird photographer but shoot some for fun.
People claim the R7 hits the buffer and stops dead, not allowing any more shots. This does not happen to my camera! In EFCS, it pauses for under a second and then continues in splutters and bursts, like the Sony cameras do. In ES it pauses once for about 3 secs and then continues on in splutters and bursts.
You once claimed the buffer is small. Shooting at 15fps (cRaw) in ES you get 187 shots (as per Canon's specs). Shooting in EFCS at 15fps (cRaw) I get 330+ shots. Who shoots for 20+ seconds at a time?
The R7 could have been a much better camera than they delivered. It would not have taken much effort to do so. I can understand why people are frustrated waiting for a refresh on this one. I hope they surprise us with a June announcement ;)
That buffer needs to clear quickly - they need to threat it as a flagship camera that it is and not just an APS-C camera.
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker I agree with you in this last statement, The R7 should have been a truly flagship! However, I do have to say that must of the times you (as well as other youtubers) are very harsh on this camera. As far as I know you never had it to test it! Yes, I'm sure that your answer will be : "I don't need it cause I do my researches" and maybe, just maybe, you are right but testing gear goes beyond what is being described on a sheet of paper, even beyond of what others say! The statement that the R7 should not even be considered for wild life is nothing but far from truth! I rather prefer to have the R7 (even in low light) than cropping on a image! IMO the R7 is the best companion for any current FF in Canon lineup. Even with it limitations, it blows out of the way any DSLR in Canon lineup (including the 7D mkII) in terms of AF capabilities and accuracy.
I was one of the first adopters of this camera here in Canada. Then afer a year and half I moved on to the R6 mkII because I needed that extra low light capability and guess what, I didn't notice much of an improvement in AF accuracy compared with the R7. Actually after having the R6 mkII I realized (even more) how good the R7 was. A small fact, I still notice almost the same inconsistency in terms of AF accuracy, using af continuous mode, with relative big and easy moving targets with my R6 mk II as I did with my R7. With very fast moving subjects, and I'm not talking about birds in flight but jet fighters for instance, I don't get a keeper rate higher that 63-67% using long lenses and yes, I have used higher end lenses like the EF 100-400 mk II.
I hope the Canon R7 II
will fix the rolling shutter and all the other problems.
Without fixing the rolling shutter, it is not useful for wildlife photography.
Worthy update to the 7D Mk II? The current R7 is in a different world to the 7D Mk II. I had one with only 8200 shutter count and battery grip. It was so far behind my R7 I gave it away for free! I'm not kidding. It was terrible in terms of focusing, image quality, dynamic range and ISO performance, compared to the R7.
Yeah. I don’t understand this huge problem with rolling shutter either. I just use electronic first curtain. ZERO rolling shutter and 15 fps is plenty.
You give very wrong information about Canon R7. It's a very capable camera with amazing AF and great sensor and fantastic speed up to 30 fps RAW! I use it mostly with RF 100-400 lens. It's a fantastic combo, so capable and versatile. I shoot with it mostly birds, but also even butterflies and dragonflies! Besides, I try to photograph them in flight and very successfully! I bought this combo 2 years back. For these two years I became finalist or won awards in many top class contests: HIPA2024 (Portfolio), GDT EWPY, NPOTY, BIRDO, CUPOTY, Golden Turtle, Best of Russia, The Most Beautiful Country by the Russian Geographic Society and a number of others. Almost all my winnings photos were captured with this combo Canon R7 + RF 100-400. Almost all the photos are birds or dragonflies, mostly in flight. And I shoot almost all the time with electronic shutter on speeds 15 to 30 fps. So it's absolute nonsense that Canon R7 can't take good photos of birds in flight. On the contrary, it's one if the best tools for bird photography on the market! Why fo you give people so wrong information?
It's very capable, though admittedly my R7 has largely been shelved ever since I added the R6 MKii to my line-up.
That's mostly account that I have only 1 telephoto zoom lens 100-500 L series. Obviously can't use that on 2 cameras at the same time.
Have gotten amazing shots of raptors, and waterfowl with the R7. Even amazed me with how well it could capture a hummingbird.
I get picture like those you've shown when using the E shutter on my R7. And I only use electronic when I'm in precapture, trying to grab the takeoff of a bird. I typically stay in mechanical for in-flight birds.
But yes, that AF struggles a lot. I can see my subject in focus till the moment I hit the shutter, the AF shifts to the background quite often. An R7ii will benefit greatly with the Accelorator chip.
The R7 is only bad if you're shooting fast action. If you are shooting portraits, weddings and events then it's a great camera.
Oh, man, this video is just a beautiful commentary! "Canon thinks of APS-C as something you give to your kids It's something you try out as a hobbyist." That is EXACTLY the right take on what Canon did with the R7. And I know that risks upsetting people who own the R7, but it's a commentary on Canon and not the buyers. It was $1,899 with a kit lens and that's a lot of money for a camera to give to the kids, or for serious amateurs wanting to do bird work - not to mention the people wanting to use it for videography. The point is, with a 26ms readout speed, Canon KNEW it was going to have serious problems with rolling shutter distortion.
By producing a large number of bodies, Canon gives themselves a lot of opportunities to recycle technology and then use the cripple hammer to try and segment their lineup. The real question for the R7II is whether they will treat it like a serious APS-C flagship body, or just throw in some recycled features and charge an APS-C flagship price. I guess we'll worry about that in 2026.
I don't know, guys, I'm not sure I agree with either take. The R7 was definitely not intended for kids, with its 2 card slots and 30 FPS? Seriously. Now, the M200, M50, R100, R50 - yes, I do believe those were purpose built for beginners. My take on the R7 - brace yourself - it's basically the 90D in an RF body, with updated FW & HW chipset to match Canon's latest at the time, and "moderately upmarketed" with 2 card slots to appeal to (gulp) professional wildlife photographers needing an RF version of the 7D series. What I'm suggesting is that, yes, they definitely took a serious swing at it, and basically hit a foul ball. And why did that happen? It's all idle speculation - nobody on the outside would ever really know. I most strongly suspect they took the fastest route and reused the 90D sensor, and here we are with the outcome. I also would speculate that possibly nobody within Canon's inner circle are out there chasing hummingbirds and BIF in the back country - and that furthermore, they possibly did NOT realize there was any sort of an issue because their people don't have the same artistic sensitivities & priorities as professional birders do. Well, as we see, perhaps they have heard the voice of the consumer over the years with the R7, and in a year or two, we will probably have an R5 mk2-like R7 mk2 that will solve most all of the noted issues. Just my warbly hip shots in the dark, not truly knowing what happened, but having a try at it in any case.
Had nothing but trouble with it for around a year, so swapped it for an R6mkii and haven’t looked back. Far better autofocus performance. The sensor is just too dense in pixels to perform properly with the chip on there. Good high ISO performance but generally a struggle in low light. I lost a lot of money on the setup, the camera should never have come to market with such awful flaws.
Sadly a far greater price also. Great camera though
As a 7D and 7D Mark II enthusiastic user, I was disappointed with the R7. As reports came in from very good wildlife photographers about the poor performance with the AF, that was the final blow. One speculation is that the poor AF, despite having Canon's incredible DPAF, is that the slow readout speed might be a major factor impacting AF reliability.
I'm not an engineer, but that does make sense to me, given how reliant mirrorless cameras are on their imaging sensor for AF, whereas the main AF module is a separate piece on a DSLR. I think the issue is that Canon "parts binned" their first-gen APSC cameras, just like they did with the first-gen full-frame ones, the R and the RP, both of which used older sensors from DSLR's and both of which couldn't compete well with more developed and refined mirrorless competitors. They fixed that with their second gen full frame R5 and R6, which had new sensors which, while not stacked, had much faster readout speeds and thus less rolling shutter and killer AF systems. And things got better with Gen 2 (R3, R6 Mark II and R8) and better still with their third (R5 Mark II and R1). Now they just need to do the same with their second-gen APSC cameras, with new sensors across the board.
The disappointment with the R7 is what led me to choose the R8 in its place and I'm VERY happy with it. That being said, I do love APS-C for wildlife and a really stellar R7 Mark II will find itself in my camera bag for sure!
As to Black Friday deals, I got a 16mm f/2.8 ultra-wide angle lens, my first ever lens in this category. Loads of fun for landscapes and architecture shots and I'm having a blast with it! 😁
A faster 33MP sensor and steadier AF system would be great. I dare to dream of a CF Express type B slot, but that can wait. I'm curious about how Canon will price it. With the R5-I being around $2799 they would be wise to hit the $2499 mark if possible. Just my own opinion. Cheers, Simon!
Thanks for your thoughts. The rolling shutter is the biggest issue with the R7. I find the AF mostly acceptable, but I will wait for a few months and market feedback before I will buy the R7 MK2. I have a full frame camera and hardly use it. APSc is a much better fit for my use cases and wallet.
29ms read out was an error in judgement - no idea how that got approved.
@ it was approved by the cripple hammer department. Canon will learn one day
I get great results with efcs. Bit unfair to say it's no good for birding. As for joke, definitely not. Pick the camera up, learn to shoot with it, figure out its strengths and weakness and like all cameras you will get results. Give it more time Simon and I am sure you will also get results 👍
You are right Kevin. I should have drawn the distinction between mechanical and electronic. That's was unfair.
A battery grip for the r7mk2 please!
Shoot in EFCS and don’t worry about rolling shutter. AF is very good especially for a $1,500 camera if you know how to use it. Not being able to take great BIF shots is laughable. The “joke” in this review isn’t the camera.
Man, the R7 would be the perfect APS-c Camera if it weren't for the damn horrid rolling shutter.
I've just had my R7 returned after a £540 repair bill for a main pcb replacement after it failed to switch on to be told that basically that's mirrorless bodies for you and they're just more fragile than dslr bodies. I've used Canon gear for 0ver 40 years and thankfully I still own my EF glass and my 2 x 7d mk2 bodies, knowing what I know now I wished I'd have realised that mirrorless cameras are basically more video orientated before investing well into 5 figures on the mirrorless system. Great content and I hope that if the R7mk2 does come to fruition that it's certainly more capable and not so flimsy in build.
I don't think that mirrorless bodies are inherently more fragile. They shouldn't be, since moving a mirror is a major chance for mechanical failure. I think Simon nailed it with the comment about Canon's attitude toward APS-C bodies, and full frame being for "serious" photographers. I've said before on this channel, the thing I'll be looking for first with the R7ii is weather sealing. I'm sure they will upgrade the technology. I'm looking for a sign that they will make it robust enough for serious work in the field.
Just so I don't give the wrong impression, I really feel the pain of your big repair bill. It's pretty much impossible not to look at those unexpected expenses as money you could have spent on something like a new lens.
@scotthime6928 the repair bill is the repair bill, I've made my peace with that. It was a get it repaired or bin it situation so in that respect a no brainer. I would like a modern, well built , weather sealed camera. More than happy to pay a premium price for decent kit. It would appear that the photographic side of camera manufacture recently has been totally disregarded for video capabilities and most certainly the decreased life span of hardware. Thanks for your thoughts. 👍
i was excited when the R7 was announced but not when it arrived, its why i stuck with the M50, still provides excellent results with 400-600mm wildlife, i thought i'd wait for either the R7II or the price of the R5 to drop.
Just to add something here, all that you mentioned is about the electronic shutter, with mechanical shutter it's just as good as any other camera
R7 is a great camera as is…..use first curtain or mechanical shutter. So many top bird photographers are using it even if they left it with no updates it’s fine.
True, I failed to draw the distinction between electronic and mechanical.
I’ve never preordered anything. If they gave us this race car version of the R7 for bird photography, I would sell a kidney and preorder it.
Pairing that with the RF100-500 would be my dream set up. Working weight of my gear will always be a consideration for me. THIS set up would make me stop watching Nikon reviews.
The EOS 7D II body was fantastic, with a less than ideal sensor. Hopefully, Canon will get the R7 II body right this time (R6 II like body} with a decent stacked sensor.
People have made their feedback clear. The readout speed shall be addressed.
Thank you for the beautiful video. I totally agree with what you say, I have always had two cameras, one with an APS-C sensor and the other with a full frame. I used Nikon for years, but as soon as I tried the Canon R7 I traded in my Z8 and Z50 and bought both the Canon R7 and the R5, changing the entire set of lenses. The switch from one brand to the other cost me a lot, but it was necessary because Nikon did not have (and still does not have) a camera with an APS-C sensor up to par. Manufacturers are wrong if they only think about improving the performance of "Full Frame" sensors. If Nikon had had a Z50 with at least a stabilized sensor, I would not have sold off my cameras to switch to Canon. This does not mean that I judge my current EOS R5 (Mark 1) better than the Z8. It means that for those like me who can use the same professional (and expensive) lenses for full frame, but who also have fun with the aps-c format are forced to turn to the brand that overall manages to offer the best even with the Apsc format. I feel sorry for Nikon, but the money goes where passion and fun take them. (sorry for the bad English)
Love / hate my R7's :) lol I know most folks are most concerned about "rolling shutter..... which is a problem for me sometimes, although I don't care to do, or view, a lot of BIF shooting. Sometimes Hummers in Hover. JMPO, about 5% of birds on the planet look better in flight, but for myself, they still need to be sharp, good exposure, great color, eye contact, and NOT on a blue sky BG. If I were more into BIF, I'd have probably kept my R5.
Anyway, to me where the R7 needs a lot of improvement, is with the AF and EAF. Just not very consistent / sticky. And its not "only" about needing good light or contrast. I've had it just get completely lost under fantastic lighting conditions.
Also, I've gotten about as used to "No battery grip" as I'm going to get, and it still bugs me. Come on Canon, rip us off with an over priced OEM grip :) lol {you can't tell I'm still bitter about having to buy that over priced grip for my R5..... which failed 6 months later, can you ?}
I will say, I use the R7 > because I pretty much have to. But I think a LOT of folks who buy the R7, bought the wrong camera. I think it's kind of a niche camera, that just happens to fit my needs the best.... But leaves me with lots of issues that need to be worked around.
When the R7 and R10 came out I wanted to buy the R7.
But after I’ve heard about the slow readout, the consistent problems with the AF and more minor issues.
I instead grabbed the R10, I know it’s even worse but since it was half the price of the R7 and actually available unlike the R7.
I hoped that we would get a successor pretty soon.
Well we still don’t have on (yet) and on Black Friday I got a R5 mark II and even got a 5% discount.
When the R7 mark II comes out I might consider it as a second/specialized camera. Although my second camera will probably become the R6 mark III.
Just switch R7 to mechanical shutter. For decades it was good for DSLR.
Then what's the point in buying a mirrorless camera??
@badboyvr4 No need, I have some DSLR.
So glad were talking about readout speed. Which is very important
Cannon R7 is 32 to 29 ms
Sony a6700 26 to 23 ms
I hope sony comes with a newer a7000 to blow away this camera. Maybe a better BSI CMOS or even a GLOBAL sensor!
Awesome video as always
Canon needs a good APSC kit lens and treats R10 as a baby R7 - otherwise leave the R10 concept. R50 should be for beginners and R10 must be for wildlife beginners with the same sensor of R7 but R10 may not have IBIS and a big battery.
infomrative news thanks Simon.
Will consider ordering the R7 II using your links once it is released - let’s see
Samyang are also preparing an ultra wide lens for Canon RF-s, and that's great news at least for the Canon RF APS-C users.
I passed on the R7 bc it felt like too big of a downgrade while switching back and fourth with my R5... I want an R7 MKII to feel like and R5 MKII with a APS-c sensor. I want a battery grip this time too.
Canon R7 mark 2 - The APS-c little Brother of the Canon R5 Mark 2 ---- $ 3,500.00 with battery grip.
What about the global shutter canon still is working on. It would be easier and less expensive to put it an ASPC camera first IF it’s something that could be ready by 2026
Hi Simon …a bit off post…I finally got r5ii … got a problem with card lexar 128GB type b… out of r3…I formatted in r5ii…take a few shots and randomly tells me card full… I remove card put it back and sometimes it is ok sometimes not or sometimes I have to format card again … any ideas ?…is it fault of camera? Thanks
I just got the new 24mm and 50mm today.
Got lucky with a refurbed R5 @ $1999. Was hoping it would drop below $2k and it did … by a dollar.
That is a very good price indeed.
R7 is my favorite camera and I get beautiful photos, I can't wait to get version I I 👍
It will be a great improvement on the current version.
It's a $1500 camera. It's deeply flawed and to turn it into something worthwhile will bring it to $2500+. I dumped it after a week. Those that love it are under the assumption that the camera is more important to get reach than the focal length of the lens. Bird photography isn't cheap. A mediocre at best performing crop sensor is no substitute for proper glass
The proud heritage of the Canon "7-series" has been depleted. Canon wasted valuable goodwill in the bird photography community with the R7. I'm not sure they'll ever get that back.
4:05 he means 7dii
Yes, thanks...
I do disagree with you on one point about the R7, Simon. You said no serious birder would be caught dead with it. Disagree. Yes you cannot use it for action or flight bird photography, but with its equivalent 80MP sensor and crop factor it's a brilliant bird stills body. 80MP, 1300mm equivalent 200-800 and the light weight associated with both lens and body and it's a dream to use for that scenario