My in-depth review of the Canon EOS R7 for photography! Check MPB to buy and sell used gear: prf.hn/l/Rvlz95l Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Gordon’s retro gear channel: ru-vid.com Canon EOS R7 at B&H: bhpho.to/3Pxgy0p / WEX UK: tidd.ly/3wFosgB Equipment used for producing my videos Sony A6400: amzn.to/3hul53c Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): bhpho.to/3HiafJL 00:00 - Introduction and alternatives 01:51 - RF-S system, lenses, adapters 06:06 - MPB Sponsorship 07:12 - EOS R7 Design and controls, battery, grip 10:14 - EOS R7 viewfinder 11:44 - EOS R7 screen 12:28 - EOS R7 ports and connectivity 13:16 - EOS R7 card slots 14:46 - EOS R7 sensor and quality settings 16:42 - EOS R7 resolution vs X-H2 and X-H2S 19:21 - EOS R7 noise in JPEG and RAW 20:03 - EOS R7 RAW dynamic range 20:39 - EOS R7 IBIS stabilisation 22:55 - EOS R7 autofocus 22:55 - EOS R7 human face and eye detection 24:48 - EOS R7 bird photography with RF 100-400 26:34 - EOS R7 bursts, mechanical and electronic shutter 27:19 - EOS R7 birds in flight 30:49 - EOS R7 rolling shutter skewing 31:39 - EOS R7 RAW burst and pre burst 33:22 - EOS R7 interval, bulb timer, multiple exposure 33:37 - EOS R7 focus bracketing 35:03 - EOS R7 verdict and sample images Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
@@daniel635biturbo thanks, I only shoot RAW when I need to, which is rarely. My In Camera book is all about that, the joy of embracing JPEG since it's good enough for many of us in most situations. Plus, when a camera is brand new, the RAW files aren't even supported by third parties for a while, so when I present a review as the NDA expires, RAW is rarely if ever an option anyway. Rookie reviewer mistake.
If past historical action is any indicator, Canon is specifically stifling product lines in order to upsell higher grades of product i.e. R6. Having first shot film and EFS digital bodies Elan 7, EOS 3, and EOS 20D as well as full frame EF digital EOS 5Ds Marks I-IV, Canon follows the money. Canon is very willing to spend on making lower cost bodies but rarely goes into great depth making a variety of lower cost lenses. That might be the right thing to do on their part, but it only leads Canon customers to upgrade to full frame gear. On a lark almost 6 years ago, I bought an X-T2. Succinctly, I never looked back. I shot weddings and portraits using Fujifilm negative film NPC, NPH, NPZ, and Neopan. I loved it! I trained when I was a child with an old Nikon FE body so working with a Fujifilm body was old hat. I like Fujifilm’s corporate philosophy (likely changing for the worst) while Canon’s hasn’t changed at all when it came to Pro DSLR and now Pro and prosumer mirrorless. I think a better comparison for the R7 would have been with the X-T5 side by side (I’m aware that the XH2 has the same sensor). I appreciate your work, your content, your channel, and most importantly you. Be well and stay healthy.
Love the review. I bought an R7 as a second body a couple of months ago and I love it. Handles big fast glass well and renders beautifully tack sharp images with the right settings under the right conditions. I happen to thread the needle of being the type of photographer who benefits from its technical strengths without being held back by its technical weaknesses. I hope they eventually solve some of these issues with the R7 mark ii, though. And i really hope they release some stellar prime glass for this line.
Thanks for the excellent review and Fuji comparisons. I'm a Fuji shooter here and while Canon's AF is really appealing...the lens prices and choices really just seem cost prohibitive and choice restrictive compared to Fujifilm. If Tamron and Sigma were available for RF-S, especially for the Sigma Trio + 18-50 and the 17-70 RXD, it would really help the value proposition of R7.
Thanks for the review, Gordon. As an exclusive Canon APS-C user I am of course extremely interested in this camera. For me, with my sizeable collection of EF & EF-S mount lenses, it would not make sense to go with Fuji, and I don't like the higher price anyway. But I'm not buying the Eos R7 either. My 90D has just about the smallest size that my hands are comfortable with, so the fact the R7 is smaller worries me. It also worries (and angers) me that Canon don't allow third party RF lenses - at least not if they have autofocus. Also I'm still disappointed that there isn't an Eos R7-E version with eye-controlled AF. In previous centuries I used an affordable Canon Eos 50-E. And I was so happy with it that I bought an extra body. I still miss the eye-control, but although I still have the bodies, I can't use them anymore. A: I'd hate to go back to film, B: the Eos 50-E lacks one feature that I didn't need then, but do need now: A diopter for the viewfinder. Besides, the plastic seems to have disintegrated and become brittle over the years, so the cameras don't actually work anymore. Perhaps due to my storing them in an oak wood cabinet with plywood shelves. I imagine some fumes in it (formaldehyde or whatever? I'm not a chemist) could have caused the problem. So I've decided that my Canon DSLRs (90D, 70D, 550D) are just fine! In fact they're still great!
I usually hit the shutter for just a short tap when I use raw burst pre-capture. I often don't need a lot of what happens after and almost all of the shots I want are from the action just before I pushed the shutter. It catches those moments very well.
Thanks for the detailed review. I wanted to ask if you had some troubles with setting exposure compensation on the R7. In my experience it is not always possible for some reason and usually you need to do some action like focus on some point before you are allowed to change it. It used to be the same on M6 mk II, but it worked well on the original M6.
Many thanks for a great detailed in depth review of the Canon EOS R7 and a useful comparison to the Fujifilm X-H2. I currently use a Canon EOS 90D which suits my needs very well and I fail to see any advantage that switching to the EOS R7 would give me. Canon is playing catch-up with mirrorless APS-C and I applaud their attempt with the R7. With mirrorless sales replacing DSLR sales it was essential for Canon to address this market and maybe they should have done so earlier had engineering resources and semiconductors been available. The R7 is not perfect and I hope that there is a mark 2 in the future roadmap. Neglecting the cost factor I would be tempted to choose the Fujifilm X-H2 over the Canon R7 but it would be close. At some point in future I may switch from a DSLR to mirrorless ILC and if Canon are able to launch a R7 mark 2 with a high resolution EVF, a top LCD, a battery grip or better batteries, maybe a slightly higher megapixel sensor, better ergonomics, a built in flash and a wide range of third party lenses then I shall be very tempted to purchase such a camera sooner rather than later.
Both the Canon x0.71 adapter and the Metabones EF to RF Speedbooster work really well with the Canon EOS R7. The Canon one will throw an error, when firing up the R7, saying, that it's not supported, but it works just fine. The Metabones Speedbooster is the better choice though. It's fully been updated to work with the Canon EOS R7 and has that little scroll wheel, that can be used like the control ring.
@@cameralabs another thing to keep in mind: Canon only lists their x0.71 adapter as supported on the C70 and R5 C. They actually nerfed it for the likes of the EOS R. Yes it works, but you get locked out from using that extra F-stop. I reckon the EOS R7 firmware has just not caught up to that yet, because it is available. And that is one more reason to opt for the Metabones Speedbooster. I had that one already, as I used it to remedy the 4k 1.7 crop on my EOS R (well, to bring it back to 1.2), but I did get the Canon one, when I got my R5 C, just to see, if there really was a difference (optically, I feel, there is not. But that is subjective)
Good review, but unless I missed it, you forgot to mention auto level! Seems like such a small feature, but so so useful for landscape! No more fussing with getting the tripod perfect, or losing resolution on straightening in post. :-) I've been using the R7 since August, and a few more observations/opinions. 1) I don't have any issue with the dial around the joystick. Perfectly fine there, unless you're using another Canon body as well and I'd understand going between the two could be a hassle. 2) As someone who is right-eye dominant, I don't use the joystick now - I only use the screen with my thumb to move AF points - so much easier! 3) As I shoot many hockey games, I won't have any issue with the buffer. I rarely hold it down for more than a second...practice and timing shots I find better than filling up cards, and spending more time in post. I get this might be different for different subjects, but for sports the way I shoot, not an issue 4) The lack of battery grip is a head scratcher. Though, I've never used one and probably never will, I totally get why some would want it. All the mid-range/pro Canon bodies have had that in the past, so really puzzling. 5) Buy the control ring adapter for EF glass. That extra "dial" is very much worth it. My two Tamron FF lenses, older Sigma EF-S lenses work fine (the Tamrons weren't always accurate for AF on my DSLRs, and getting about the same on R7). My 70-200 2.8 III and 135 F2 work fantastic. No issues, and will not upgrade to the RF 70-200 as I much prefer the internal zooming of the old EF. 6) The EVF is fine. Unless you're used to the higher res ones, it works well enough (I've personally only used the EOS R which is higher res). 7) I'm finding processing high-ISO photos to work best in DXO PureRaw2. I've done side by sides with Lightroom (the worst), DPP (good), Topaz (color shift issues), and DXO and consistently getting very good results in PureRaw2. I've seen enough evidence in my photos to not use Lightroom at all for photos about 1600 as a noise reduction software (I'll process noise/sharpening in PureRaw2 and then finish edits in Lightroom). In fact, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot up to 6400 for hockey games if I needed to. Usually I'd restrict it to about 3200 tops on the 80D, and try hard to stay less than 2500 when I used a 7DII (which, admittedly didn't use much). Though the noise is similar at a pixel level between 80D vs R7 from my eyes, I'm guessing the extra resolution is helping to retain detail (viewing at the same size). 8) My final comment is as I'm new to mirrorless, but experienced with DSLRs, I'd say that so much has changed that I don't think it's really fair to compare these to bodies from the past - I understand Canon's reluctance to do that (though, they shouldn't have called it R7 then!). I get we all want to figure out the lineage, but there's really no point. Based on it's own merits, I think the R7 is an awesome camera, and fantastic value that is far more capable that a lot of us might need! Again, thanks for your fantastic thorough review (as always)!
Thank you for your detailed review. In my view this camera is aimed more at the discerning amateur for whom the price of this camera plus a couple of lenses seems fairly expensive already. I bought the R7 and it works well with my EF 100 - 400 L II using the adapter. I have used adapted EFs lenses with the R7 and they work well. I bought the camera because of the autofocus system. The limited buffer is of no great concern to me as I don't want end up with a gazzillion pictures to wade through at the end of a shoot. As ever other makes are available and in the case of the Fujis quite a bit more expensive. The good thing is there are plenty of choices available
As a Fuji wildlife and motorsports shooter with the XH-1, I did consider other brands. But nothing I could find would touch the speed, features or lens reach to price of the Fuji. Although both Canon and Sony have a little more consistent AF in the price range, Canon has all kinds of lens problems, whether it’s price, AF coverage, support for third parties, or even pulsing on Sigma telephotos. Sony has only really developed its full-frame range, with a6600’s evf like the R7, worst than my four year old Fuji. Then we have the full frame a7iv, but it’s really slow, and although full-frame lenses are generally brighter, the reach for me, just isn’t there. Ultimately I found a discount for the X-H2s with cards, so I’m very happy. I’ll probably upgrade my Fuji 100-400 to either the longer Tamron or Fuji next year. But thanks for an excellent and comprehensive review as always.
Completely agree with you as a Sony shooter. Sony has been too late to update the apsc series. 4 years without anything new is a lot. While the a6600 was already outdated in many aspects including electronic shutter fps, video specs and the lack of front dial.
Since you are a Fuji user, can you speak on if fujifilm xh2 is sharp enough generally? One thing I do notice is that Sony and canon photos are always sharper with less noise.. but I want to try Fujifilm. Xt5 or xh2 ?
Pretty good in depth review IMO. Being a 7Diu owner and got bored waiting for 7Diii to be released in the middle of the mirrorless wars. The R7 was my best choice for an upgrade. From people I have chatted to they appreciate the cheap price, however they would have paid more for higher Res EVF and bigger buffer with faster card slots. Canon could have made a R7 S, the higher spec model for customers with more cash to spend. TBH, most people would go for a R7s ! What we are really paying for is the eye AF alien technology in a cheap body, with outvthat tye R7 is a mediocre camera compared to its peers, fuji Xt range and Sony A6600. I now have the R7 and focus is amazing and my keeper rate of my 7Dii is very larger indeed. Subject tracking, eye detection all work very, very well. The high Red sensor does push ISO a lot higher than I am happy with. However, the results are still much better than the 7Dii and even my Sony A6600 a 24mp camera. Lenses vary an issue and what I would really like is a sigma EF version of their sony e mount fit 18-50 f2.8, which is a very sharp lens, no IS though ! I am not sure why Canon did not put more spec into the R7, unless price is sensitive to luring people from other brands and appeal to 7Dii owners. Plus alot of 7Dii owners have invested in L grade glass zooms and unwilling to sell all to buy fuji XT with new glass. It is almost financial suicide !
I've had my R7 for almost 6 months now, and I'm very pleased with what it does for the cost. I do photography as a hobby, so being budget conscious is important to me. That said, I am hoping Canon decides to allow third party manufacturers to make RF mount lenses that could be more affordable. If not, I may decide to switch to Sony although their camera body prices are higher, they offer more lens options than Canon. Why would I want to upgrade to full-frame with Canon when the lens choices are still limited? That doesn't make sense to me.
Very detailed review, thank you! If price is not a factor, would you recommend the new R6 II mainly for bird photography given all the shortcomings of the R7 despite its extra reach when paired with the RF 100-500mm?
Great review. I bought an R7 recently as an upgrade to my 7D2 that I used almost all the time with the EF 100-400 II. It is taking a while to get used to the new AF, but it is very capable, and whilst not as rugged as the 7D2 I am not a professional wildlife photographer nor did I use a grip with the 7D2. Image quality is great and the high ISO performance a little better with the R7 but not a major difference, especially with the AI noise reduction tools available now. The extra resolution is handy when cropping. I haven't used the video features much, but as a hybrid tool the R7 is streets ahead of the 7D2. One of the things that attracted me is the smaller size/weight when combined with the RF100-400 (appealing for travel and being less conspicuous). I haven't bought that yet but may well do so. I did look at the Fujis because they have the specifications many were hoping for with the R7 e.g. BSI (and I really like the top info panel), but it would mean new lenses plus they appear to be no match for the weight/size/performance/value for money of the R7 and RF 100-400. Similar thoughts about the OM-1. Plus I can easily interchange with my EOS-R. I'll probably upgrade that to an R6II or R5 for the benefits of FF for wildlife (R is great for anything else that doesn't move rapidly). The big thing is learning how to use these very sophisticated tools. I have had the R for several years now and keep finding new things.
Gordon, not the Canon 0.71x adapter, but I use the Metabones EF-RF speed booster on my R7 and it works brilliantly. Unlike the Canon adapter, which will give you a warning with an error (saying it's not supported on non-cine cameras), the Metabones speed booster "just works". The optics are the same as their ultra 0.71x speed boosters on other mounts and the autofocus works as well as the native lenses on the EF-RF in my experience. The Metabones also doesn't seem to exhibit the purple flaring issue that some people have reported on the Canon 0.71x and has overall similar or perhaps actually a bit better image quality (from comparing samples). It definitely gets a thumbs-up from me. Also worth trying are the filter adapters (on FF too); I have a Kolari (physically compatible with Canon's) and use it with Kolari and Breakthrough filters, and that's also really neat on any RF camera.
I've been awaiting your full review. As a 7DII user (and the 7D before it) I'm very interested in the line's mirrorless successor. I've been watching many reviews on the R7, including the excellent bird photography videos of Duade Paton and Jan Wegener. What's become clear to me in the various reviews, including yours, is that the R7 is something of a mixed bag. For a 7D II user, which took DSLR AF to pretty close to its apogee, the R7 is clearly a huge step up in this regard. And the 15fps mechanical shutter is a huge step up from the 10fps of its DSLR forebear. But in other regards, such as build, robustness and ergonomics, it's not an equivalent to what came before. Here in Canada, it's about 2 grand, body only (around the same price I paid for my 7D II brand new in 2014, so it's not a cheap camera for me. Moreover, although its AF is stellar, by comparison to the 7DII, it's apparently not as reliable as the R5 and R6. This is a significant change from the DSLR days when the 7DII had a better AF system than the 5D III (and probably than the 5D IV) and MUCH better than the 6D. What seems apparent in that fact is that the R6 has moved up in Canon's line, relative to the 6D series, while the R7 has moved downwards, compared to the 7D series. The lack of a CF Express slot kind of presses that home (the 7D and 7D II, both had a CF card slot), s does the slow readout on the sensor and the resulting rolling shutter that makes the 30fps electronic shutter something of a gimmick on the R7. Someone at Canon seems to have taken the idea that "Full Frame needs to be higher up the line, even compared to a dedicated performance crop-frame camera." It appears that the 7 series is no longer in the same prestigious position it once was, within Canon's lineup. So, I'm still on the fence. If they put it onto an attractive sale, I might bite, but the price didn't really go down even for Black Friday sales. I have genuinely mixed feelings about it and the 7D Mark II still delivers excellent bird in flight results, if I work hard and do my part well. Perhaps the R5's might become attractive on the second-hand market, now that the R5 II has been announced! But thank you so much for your detailed review.
I find it too bad that the folks making it seem like a "mixed bag" are either trying to compare to cameras that are 2.5 times the R7 price (in Canada, R5 at $5400), or trying to figure out where it aligns in the line-up like the good ol days of DSLRs. I've been shooting with the R7 now since August, and I understand Canon's reluctance to compare to the older DSLRs (despite everyone else trying to). From what I recall, the 7D II uses Compact Flash, not CF Express, and UHS-I...the R7 is two UHS-II cards. Whatever Canon's reasoning for SD, the buffer still manages about 60 shots in 15fps mechanical mode (vs about 30 for the 7DII), and up to 180 in CRAW (not an option if I recall on 7DII). As someone who shoots a lot of hockey, I don't have an issue with this as I rarely just hold the shutter down for that long. AF is better than any DSLR was - regardless if it's better/worse than the R6/R5/R3, it's that simple. As far as size goes, I understand some liked the large sizes of 7D and 5D - I did not, and am glad to see these bodies shrinking down. Personally for reference, I think the 80/90D/6DII was about the perfect size body and ergonomics. The R7 is slightly smaller, but the grip is better (medium size hands). I think so much has changed since the 7DII was released that while on paper cameras can be compared, they're so different that in actual use it's pointless. Is it perfect? No, it is questionable why Canon didn't make a battery grip for example. The EVF seems low res in 2022 (but, unless you use another body with higher res, it's likely not going to be an issue). And that's just on the photo side. Video is yet another (impressive) story for the R7. Either way, stick with the 7DII if you still love it! But it's probably worth trying the R7 for yourself as well. I definitely don't think it's a mixed bag - I'm very impressed with it so far!
@@IntothewestOkotoks Interesting response. My counterpoints: 1. The name R7 implies that this is the successor to the 7D Mark II, just as R5 implies that that camera is the successor to the 5D Mark III and IV. Saying that it's not a relevant comparison seems rather silly. 2. The 5D Mark III and the 5D Mark IV both cost FAR MORE than the 7D Mark II, yet the latter had the superior AF system. So expecting the R7 to be a match for the R5/R6 AF system isn't unreasonable in the least, no matter what you claim. 3. "The 7DII has CF not CF Express." Um...really? It doesn't have a technology of card that didn't exist when it was created!!! Do tell! LOL The point was, the 7D Mark II used the same type of card that the top of the line 1DX used, so expecting its successor to get the current top of the line card is in no way shape or form unreasonable. I must point out that the reviewers I mentioned are doing the sort of photography that I do - bird photography. And both of them found the AF system of the R7, although admittedly EXCELLENT, it is not as good as the R5 or the R6. Don't get me wrong. They LIKE the R7 and they do recommend it, albeit with the caveat that it's not quite as good as its full frame siblings. Please don't misunderstand me. I don't think the R7 is a bad camera. It's just a little short of where it could have been. I'm not sure if Canon is trying to "protect" it's full-frame camera line - they do have a tendency to do that. Will I get the R7. It IS tempting. As I'd said, if there had been a good sale on it for Black Friday, I'd have probably bought one already. I purchased my 7D Mark II on sale in 2014 on Black Friday. I may still buy one if they have a good sale in the future. The smaller size and lower weight would be a boon and, limitations notwithstanding, the AF still does blow away the 7DII or any other DSLR's AF for that matter. I'm not saying the R7 isn't a good, or even a great camera. It is. It's just not quite as remarkable in the field as the 7D Mark II was in its time and that's been a bit of a disappointment for a lot of 7D II users. The 7D II was a simply incredible camera for its time with specs that beat many of Canon's more expensive full frame cameras and was only a hair under what the top of the line 1DX offered for AF, metering and other parameters. That's made it a hard act to follow.
@@jeffgaboury3157 I understand how the naming implies the lineage, but if I recall that was Canon’s official word that it wasn’t a successor to the 90D or 7D. Anyway, my point is that naming doesn’t (or shouldn’t) really matter. I get 7DII is much loved. Not trying to knock it as a camera from 8 years ago. But my point is it’s very difficult to compare an 8 year old DSLR to a new APS-C. If the 7DII gets the photos you want, then don’t change! At the end of the day, these are tools to take photos. So, if you’re happy with it, that’s all that matters. If you got the $5400 to drop on a R5 go for it. If the R7 is missing something that you need in your next camera, for sure don’t get it…but, on it’s own merits, the R7 does far more than the past Canon APS-C DSLRs. CF Express wasn’t available correct - I misread your original post suggesting the R7 didn’t have it, but the 7DII did. Regardless, the R7 still has a decent buffer and two UHS-II cards which is definitely more capable then the 7DII. As for the AF, I haven’t used the R6 or R5, and the two RU-vid creators you mentioned definitely are credible. But, this isn’t 2014, so I’m not sure expecting a higher end APS-C AF system to be better than a camera costing $1200-3400 more in 2022 is realistic in the mirrorless world. DPAF now has changed how we use AF drastically, so yes, I can possibly understand how a larger FF camera sensor might have better AF compared to a smaller sensor - but for sure that doesn’t mean the R7 is bad - I believe it’s still better than any previous DSLR. Anyway, it’s all personal preference. I’m very happy with the R7, and it does exactly what I need it to do - and far more than previous DSLRs. I suggest you should give it a try for yourself to judge.
@@IntothewestOkotoks I may yet do so! I haven't ruled it out. My only point is that the 7D II was a "must have" camera for me in 2014 and the R7 is just a little shy of the "must have" category. I also believe that the R7 has better AF than the 7D II or any other DSLR for that matter. There are just so many things that the system can incorporate. But I was hoping that the R7's AF would be on par with the R5 and R6. And it's just a "tad" shy of that goal, being more easily confused by busy scenes, based on the two reviewers findings in the "wild." It was just a bit surprising. But both of them do say the AF is a huge step up from a DSLR, as does Gordon. I have no doubt that I'll get fantastic results if I get the R7. But now that the R5 II has been announced, there might be some great second-hand deals on R5's as people with deeper pockets than mine queue up to replace their R5's with the new model. On the other hand, I have an EF-S 15-85 and the 17-55 2.8 - both of which would probably work well on the R7, but not so well on an R5. Decisions, decisions! Thank you very much for sharing your experiences with the R7. I'm glad it's working well for you for hockey.
I have the R7 to compare to my 7D ii. The photos from my R7 are definitely cleaner than the 7Dii. I absolutely don’t miss the top LCD screen. I have all the buttons configured to everything I need. The 7D ii is still an excellent camera though.
As a Fuji user, i am probably biased but the EOS R7 is closer to the XT-5 in price and probably performance (at least with bursts and buffers etc) The Fuji lens selection for native APSC Mirrorless and with Sigma and Tamron not to mention Viltrox and others producing lenses now for Fuji X is way better than Canon has native for mirrorless but you do have the back catalogue of DSLR lenses, THE X-T5 viewfinder, may not be up to X-H2 standards but is better than the Canon, and is the rear screen
Thanks for the video. My 80D shutter died on me and the cost to repair it (as well as parts not available) forced me to bite the bullet and upgrade. I shoot a lot of wildlife as well as sports (mainly hockey) so the R7 over the 90D seems to be a no brainer. I pick up the camera tomorrow and am hoping that it will work well with my Sigma 18-35 1.8 and 70-200 2.8 lens.
I shoot wildlife and birds everyday with the R7. When I tap the shutter in electronic mode I get about seven shots, when I feather the shutter for less than a second to just over a second I get between 10 and 50 shots. I remember one or two sequences where I got 40 or more shots in a row all in focus of a bird in flight. I almost never need that many shots and I almost never hold down the shutter for that long. After I shoot and walk a couple of steps and shoot again I never have to wait on the buffer. So far that method has made any buffer and frame rate restrictions a non-issue for me with the R7.
Thanks for the dehaze tip in editing. Normally I just bring down the exposure on my grad filter to darken the skies. Have a great christmas and thankyou for this wonderful advent series. Barry Melbourne Australia.
As always, a detailed and careful review, which is much appreciated. Since roughly 90% of my photos involve wildlife and birds, I regard the extra reach of the crop sensor as essential. In the past, I used an M6 Mark II - Canon's 2019 APSC flagship. The technical specs are in fact very similar to the R7, with a 32 MP sensor, 15-30 fps mechanical/electronic, and flawless performance using Canon's EF to M adaptor with my Sigma 150-600C and Tamron 100-400 Di VC. In fact, I don't think I've ever had so much fun with a camera :). However, a number of critics have been reporting problems with EF lenses on R bodies, affecting both third party and older Canon lenses (e.g. see R7 reviews by Duade Paton or Gordon Drake). So I sold my older lenses and purchased the R7 with the RF 100-500 mm. Though I hesitated over the price, the IBIS and bird eye tracking are game changers, worth every penny if you can swing it. And the image quality of the L series lens is breathtaking. Given the price premium for the Fuji XH-2, I am not convinced that it was really in the cards, as the XT-5 would be a more realistic alternative. But a Canadian national retailer was offering 20% off Canon products in the run up to "Black Friday". At $1250 (Cnd) off the regular price, it was an offer I couldn't refuse, and I remain convinced that it was my best choice.
This is not the flagship APS-C camera that a lot of people wanted, but you get a good deal for the price. Pair it with an EF 100-400, or the RF 100-400 or 600 or 800 and you have a really nice budget kit for casual birders like me. I feel the truly hardcore wildlife and sports photographers will be unmoved by this offering and will stick to the R5 paired with a very expensive super telephoto prime.
I agree, thatvis a pretty good assessment of the situation. A friend mine has the R5 and it is a very impressive bit of kit, however itvis way too much for me a £4,500 and it eats memory cards as well ! I now own the R7 and what I have really paid for is the alien technology eye AF, which is bloody amazing !
Hi Gordon, great review. I'm interested in R7 to complement my R5 instead of buying an RF 1,4x extender to use with my RF100-500... There are 2 major drawbacks with R7 bufferdepth and rolling shutter when in ES. My R5 and RF100-500 works great when using ES but 500mm on FF is not enough reach. There are 2 drawbacks with RF1,4X and one is you loose a stop of light the other one is you must set your RF100-500 to 300mm to even mount the TC. If I use Craw and toggle between EFCS and ES maybe it's not that much of a problem. So how good is the R7's AF if you compare it to R5?
to be honest the R7 doesn't do enough for me to get it at this time, more than happy to wait for the R2 crop or R7mkII whats missing for me is a bsi stack, for sure the R7 is the better option if you don't already have a camera. one of th other benefits of the M50 aside from its crop for wildlife is the smaller ef-m lenses, the R7 itself can be small enough but its lenses will still have to fit that rf footprint so its never going to replace the compact use of the M50 Canon could have made the R7 except efm lenses and dumb down the electronics to use them with a replaceable rf / efm mount just like an adapter would swap out only this would take the pins and mount as part of that removable unit something they may have found to be a more popular hit with existing M series users as for the efm and M50 it does still make good sense for canon to keep them going as they can be more affordable for new photographers to start out at, just like i did 3 years ago then get into the canon fold just because the M50 is good at being a compact camera with its efm lenses to which i love its also make for a great beginner wildlife camera with 100-400 /150-600mm lenses too, so yeah canon, open up the rf /rfc mount to third party or you just going to loose potential body sales M50 mkIII with focus stacking in camera, yes please!!
Hi. Can you check canon and fuji shutter speed all the same condition. my fuji always 3 times slow. Is that normal? for example aperture, showing angle, focus length, light metering all major settings almost the same. of course different optic and censor but this differences effects to much especially lower light. all cameras updated. I am wondering may fuji has some problem or lacks of some setting arrangement:(
That buffer idea isn't new of course. My Casio EX-Z450 has a constant 4 second buffer in video mode, but in 2009, it was only at 720p. The R7 is awesome but I am not keen on that electronic panning effect. Thank you for your forensic review and for the time it must have taken you to make it.
Hi Gordon, cool video and lots of information and cool to see your new sponsor. MPB's prices on the old 5Dmk2 is amazing, it was my first 'proper' camera and a great first student camera, far better than buying new for a student, in my opinion. How about an all new vs all old student starter kit review? £374 for a 5Dmk2 body and £449 for a 24-105 L F4 lens, £823 makes a great starting kit for Canon... another video for Nikon or Sony kit?
Very nice review! If you start from scratch and want a pro aps-c system, which one would you recommend? I guess you will recoommend the fuji system.... 😀
comin from the 7dmk2 onto the R6 then getting the R7 I wasn’t happy with the loss of the 3rd wheel but using the ring adapter on ef lenses gave that wheel back at least I’ve now paired it up with the rf100-500 which is a great combo got my best ever kingfisher shots even better than the shots when it was paired with the ef 500 f4 is usm which I had to px to get the 100-500. The big downside to these bodies is the slow readout speed giving some crazy bird wing formations lol . the one thing really frustrating me with the R7 is I’ve got into the preburst mode for catching birds flying out their nest which is a great feature but in a way wish canon hadn’t put this in as I now love the idea of that but sadly the slow readout speed of the sensor makes this feature pointless I’ve tried it with birds and flying insects and the insects looked like they had been shot their wings were bits here there all over the place such a shame and sad that canon have added a feature which in my eyes is un useable they should have upgraded the sensor to a stacked sensor capable of handling the speed the pre shoot feature needs . fingers crossed canon will get this right for the R7mk2 but for now I feel I’m going to move over to the Olympus or check out the Fuji ( if it’s a stacked sensor ) Or go to Nikon with a stacked sensor I’m currently waiting on the Z8 see what features that comes out with .think that with the Z800 f6.3 be a top set up or go Olympus on-1 and 300 f4 pro till I can get the 150-400 f 4.5 with its built in tc 👍👍👍
Hi Gordon, wonderful review, it is the most extensive all over RU-vid. I am an owner of the R7 planning to swith over the X-H2S, but my concern is about stabilization: you mention at the end of the video that the stabilization is far better on the R7. Do you mean comparing to the X-H2S? are they so different in that matter? Many thanks!
They're actually very good, but you do miss out on the ultimate AF performance, with a loss of some speed, accuracy etc when compared with equiv RF versions
I have a 7Dii and love using it with 2 or 3 canon Speedlite flashes for portraits. All controlled easily from the 7Dii menu and the camera popup flash works as the master. The r7 has nothing like that 😩 Otherwise I think the r7 is a much better camera making much charper images and have way better video capability.
Is the R7 (even slightly) worse than R50 at autofocus. I'm interested mostly in people. Maybe it seems like a stupid question, but the R50 has the updated version of the system, having the AUTO subject detection as well.
Unless you are shooting only wide open I do not recommend purchasing the Canon 0.71x "speedbooster" for the R7. It produces a nasty purple/blue blob in the middle of the frame.
A note about using the older batteries: I tried my LP6 ones from my 6D... It works, but you get half the shutter speed at high speed burst (mechanical). I suspect it is lower amps being delivered. Not sure how it affects movies or electronic shutter.
Interesting and very likely too, but you'd really need to ensure the battery was fully charged and also not a sample that had been used a lot and lost some of its maximum output to make a fair comparison.
@@cameralabs Way ahead of you. I have 5 spare batteries, all fully charged and all gave the same slow speed. On top of that I asked a friend who had the same as me to test his end and he had the same results. It seems to go down to about 4-7 fps
Great review, my wife is an owner of a Canon 5D m2, since new, which she loves, but, as we are starting to do a lot of hiking, and the 5D is getting a bit long in the tooth and weighs a ton, the R7 seemed like the perfect answer for her, as she's a Canon fangirl as well. But, in researching Canons history of APS-C, it's very hard to go down this route, due to their lack of lenses, both in quantity and quality, looking at their EF-S lenses, they are mostly of 'kit quality' as are the EF-M series, and even the new RF-M lenses aren't anything special. She has 2 EF 'L' lenses, a 24-104 and 17-40, and a couple of beautiful old Zeiss manual primes, and hooking these lenses up to an R7 with an adaptor would defeat the purpose. It would seem that if you are serious about APS-C, Fuji is the only way to go, as their range of APS-C lenses and cameras show. I have a Nikon Z6, but for hiking, I often take my ever faithful 12 year old Olympus EM5, hmmmm, maybe I could talk her into an OM-1........
I agree, historically Canon hasn't been great at APSC lenses. They have just done an ultra wide zoom at least, but they're always budget options, leaving the aspirational stuff to FF. You're right, if you want a system that takes APSC lenses seriously, go for Fujifilm, or even smaller to M43.
Cheers, enjoyed the review. My question would be which option would give the best image.... 1, r5 with 100-500l cropped, 2 r5 with same lens but 1.4x converter, 3, r7 with same lens. In reality they all give similar reach, but what what be the sharpest/cleanest image?
@@markb3951 I think the question needs to be expanded into what aspects of image quality are they desiring. Resolution across the entire frame? Max res for potential cropping? Optical artefacts? It would make for an interesting comparison in real life and would very much depend on the TC quality.
@@cameralabs The only way the R5 makes more sense is if a) you already have one b) low light. Even an amazing TC reduces image quality. Anyways thanks for replying, have enjoyed your reviews over many years 😁
Can you please provide your raw photos clicked by canon r7. i have focusing problem in camera, Blurriness in eyes, not sharpness in photos. Please reply
I love the R7 limitations and all. Light weight and great reach as lots of built-in features when paired with RF-S 18-150 and RF100-400 w/1.4. I do have the EOS R and R5 should I need FF sensors and RF100-500. FF is heavier and bigger.
Seems Canon has done away with the mode dial lock button on all their recent offerings. Anyone have any problems with the dial getting moved unintentionally during day to day use?
Regarding the rolling shutter issues when using the 30fps electronic shutter, did you not test the first curtain electronic shutter mode at 15fps? I have heard from multiple reviews that this mode is a good compromise vs the mechanical shutter at 15fps, in that it exhibits much less rolling shutter than electronic 30fps, and it reduces focus blur issues found with the mechanical shutter at 15fps (and is much quieter than the extremely loud mechanical shutter). Your comments on this?
EFC doesn't suffer from the same rolling shutter issues, as it uses a mechanical shutter to close the exposure. It's similar in performance to a full mechanical, but reduces risk of shutter shock, so it's the best overall compromise. In fact it's the default on many cameras, so I often just refer to it as mechanical.
Canon R7 with an L series lens and Canon R5 with an RF 18-150mm Kit lens. which one will produce better image quality? and why? (normal day to day shooting, good light)
I personally feel the lack of good native lenses a big disadvantage compared to the excellent range of first party and third party lenses for the Fuji X mount. Other than brand loyalty or being second body for a Canon full frame wildlife photographer it would seem there are very few reasons to go for this instead of either Fuji X or full frame Canon. Edit: I forgot to thank you for the excellent and detailed review. Thanks Gordon 👍🏼
Could you do a test for me? Panning across a building with electronic shutter at 15fps and at 3 fps. I suspect that these would avoid the rolling shutter while keeping the other advantages of the electronic shutter. (I can't see why using the electronic shutter at the same speed as the mechanical shutter would be any more subject to rolling effects.)
Sadly it's still an issue regardless of frame rate, indeed I could show the same effect in single shooting mode. The issue with electronic shutters is the sensor readout speed.
@@cameralabs How can the same sensor read out more quickly with the mechanical shutter than with the electronic shutter? Isn't the shutter speed the controlling factor?
@@philiprolenick4475 no, because when you're using the electronic shutter, the mechanical stays open. So you're literally limited by how quickly the sensor can be read from top to bottom.
The question to ask is why Canon designed a wildllife camera that has poor weather sealing? So if you want dust or damp to enter your camera and lens (bearing in mind that the Canon RF100-400 is not weather sealed) the R7 is the ideal camera for you. For BIF, the rolling shutter will mean that you have to shoot with a mechanical shutter at virtually the same speed as the 7D Mk2 and as you say if you want to shoot RAW at 40fps, you will fill the buffer at just under one second, then you get to wait 8 seconds and hope your target waits for you to be ready. Anyone who shoots wildlife in a maritime climate will tell you that weather sealing is essential, or they only go out when the sun shines. Basica requirement would include fps and a deep buffer, and autofocus, and to be fair the Canon R7 deliver with the latter. As for the former, it is a dog's dinner and I am glad you have highlighted some of the deficiencies v the old 7D Mk2 let alone the new Fuji cameras.
@@networm64 After 8 years and tryiong to fob us off with the 90D, they should have delivered by now. Seems to me that Fuji has already deivered and there is no Canon APS-C on the roadmap so it's sayōnara Canon
I noticed that on your screen you have both IS and Digital IS. But on my R7 I only have Digital IS option. Is there any other setting that I have to change to enable in body stabilization? This is on both video and photo modes
@@cameralabs just read through the manual that the setting doesn’t appear when using IS lenses that have an IS switch. I can confirm that the IS mode setting appears on my 50mm but doesn’t when using my RF 70-200mm
@@cameralabsthanks I missed that 2 mins there. And I go back to and find out what you say. Yeah that old sensor prevents me from buying because I already have the M6 ii, and in holiday season the R7 and R8 was almost the same price yet R8 has key specs from R6 ii, so I got the R8 along with my R5. I do find Fujifilm and Nikon has some good offerings on apsc cameras.
I wouldn't be surprised to see an R4 crop sensor model with a built-in vertical grip. Almost every time Canon purposely gimps something so severely (no vertical grip) in such an obvious way it means a different model is meant to fill that role. The R7 doesn't have the high ISO performance either. I'd expect the R4 to have a 20 or 24mp sensor with better dynamic range and ISO.
@@rdm5546 Yep, and I would expect a target price a bit higher than Fuji's top end body, perhaps priced between the R5 and R6. Personally I would find a crop-sensor compact body with a built-in vertical grip extremely compelling. I almost bought an Olympus EM1X because for the fantastic form factor for the body. I liked it so much more in the field compared to the 7Dii+grip.
MPB is fair enough service for those who don't want to spend their time on private sales, they offered me 20% less compared to what I got when I sold it privately, which can be easily justified, especially when you want quickly sell multiple items at once.
One of the best things about the 7D Mark II was that it was targeted as the little brother of the 1DX Mark II. It had all the features and build quality that one would expect, and it really feels like they've dumbed this thing down to the point where it's almost pointless. This thing should have been a mini R3 with all of the build quality and features of that camera, including an optional grip. The typical Canon Cripple Hammer strikes again.
that's a bit harsh of a statement. I was a heavy user of the 7D mkII and bought the R7 last year. It is just as robust as the 7DII and much more, I wouldn't go back.
Thank you for showing JPEG-examples here and on your website. For many users this is an important information. I know some old Canon cameras with a terrible white balance and strange colors, so I never wanted Canon again.
I used to shoot Canon and after a brief, though expensive, dalliance into the 90D (it went back as faulty) and the RP I have ended up with a, perhaps weird, mix of Sony and Fuji. I scored an A7R IV used for work where I want to crop in heavily or else want a high resolution sensor. Fuji provides my every day carry and light hiking gear. I abandoned Canon because it seemed to me they just were not interested in my needs as a photographer. They needed my cash more than I needed their gear. However good the R glass both Sony and Fuji have opened up their systems and the range of affordable lenses is a big plus point. When the R7 was released I was glad I hadn't waited for it. Whatever the plus sides it is mostly underwhelming.
Why do Canon Cams look so cheap? I'm at the moment in the process of buying a cam and most likely I'll go for the Panasonic Lumix s5 as right now over here it's in the same price range as the R7 but it's full frame and a professional camera. It looks also nicer. But I'm gonna see....
I thought about moving to the Canon R mount system. However the fact that they will not be allowing any 3rd party lenses made me re-think that option. I kinda feel like they are overpriced for what you get.
Canon not offering a grip?.... Does this imply that, maybe, a 'higher level' APS-C is coming in the future.... Remember, Canon HAD a Series 1 body APS-H, the EOS 1D Mark IV.... Otherwise, Canon is going to be missing out on sure sales of battery grips for the R7, which, compared to the bodies, are fairly simple devices -- and thus 'easy money'? Also, it's a real thing that less battery power available can cause large telephoto lens (with bigger motors) to run slower, than on Series 1 and 3 cameras.
I wish I didn't feel the way I do about Canon. It's almost like I'm estranged from a member of my family. I keep hoping to feel a rapprochement with each new camera, but hasn't happened yet. On another topic, I know you're a big JPG shooter, but have you considered HEIF? How do they compare? Maybe a video idea? Size? Speed? Heavy editing, etc. Thank you as always, very detailed and thoughtful.
You’ve got the point, I agree with that. Eventually You going to have full frame RF lenses. Even if you consider about EF lens with adapter, I don’t think there is much options. especially, wide and standard focal length range. I would rather buy R6 mark2 with STM lenses than R7
No this is a very poor aps canon R7 they really dropped a very cheap and nasty camera . It does a pathetic job for the replacement of the old and solid 7DMk11. Until they bring out a far better version of the R7 this will have rubbish sales. No battery grip low res viewfinder medium buffer way to small . And why change a well tested and proven button layout. This is a non starter rather save a bit and get the R6 MkII which by all means looks a great camera
@Gordon Laing I'd venture to differ on that. I was waiting to 'upgrade' from M50 to 7D2 and got an early great eBay deal from an upgraded to R7. Before I bought it, prices in Australia were super solid around $800. Now they tanked to as low as $550 for higher shutter count pieces (I paid $600 for 123k SC) and around $600-650 for low SC specimens with 40-odd k shots.
Incorrect, this is Canon's highest-end crop sensor mirrorless with the R10 and R50 below it. It may not have the features you want, but it's still their best one with a crop sensor and RF mount.
I would think that the Olympus OM-1 would be a more useful comparison. If Canon had released the R7 before I bought the R3, I would probably have gone with an OM-1 instead. I am seriously disappointed. I find the R7 expensive compared to the features (there is just the cheap implement ones)and user interface. As a replacement for my 7D2, the R7 fails miserably.
OMG I had no idea my R7 could do focus bracketing in camera! Just tried it and it's really good. Only caveat is it processes it in JPG. Why, Canon? Why?! They love to cripple their cameras don't they?
@@ArcanePath360 if yuo set it to raw and jpg and for example take 10 images using the focus stacking option the camera will record 11 jpgs and 1 raw. There is one jpg for each raw and the 11th jpg is a stacked image that is created in camera. In that way you can see immediately what your reult will look like. If you are happy then you can stack the raw images in Photoshop
Why process in camera with raw images? That makes no sense buddy. The camera isn't crippled in this sense. JPGs are for in camera processing. RAWs are for software processing with Photoshop or other apps. That is the whole point of RAW my friend 🙂
I don't understand a company launching a fine camera like this but only offering a pair of kit lenses, with no plans for the future. Nikon are almost as bad, and they've had plenty of time to extend the lens line up.
To be fair, most systems launch with five or fewer lenses BUT the big difference here is Canon's past record with APSC - it's never been a format they've been into developing many interesting lenses for. I'd have also felt more reassured with a hint of a roadmap.
".... which Canon hopes will convert the 7D Mk2 faithful to mirrorless..." Hope is the word, they can hope all they like. The R7 isn't fit to lace the boots of the 7D Mk2 - 8 years later and the successor is not to be found at Canon's door.
Actually the 7DMK2 is rubbish compared to most modern cameras. Its just got a good rep from almost a decade ago. Photographers are a stubborn lot and don’t like change, so always goo on about how great old cameras are, means nothing to most people. Its a one trick pony that has run its last race.
Complaining about the low res evf on the r7 compares to the latest Fuji? And also complaing canon doesnt include a faster card slot? With the Fuji higher price tag... u guys customers are sooo demanding haha
The lack of a battery grip is a killer to me. I have nerve damage in my hand so having that extra space to spread out my already largish hands is a requirement. I wish I could drop the weight of the grip since weight is also fatiguing to me but bunching my hand up on the smaller grip is worse in the long run. Great review overall and I agree with it is a good camera, but it has way too many limitations to be a real 7D mk II replacement. Canon has always viewed crop cameras as entry level cameras to their full frame bodies. Why they never put much effort into the EF-S lenses(besides the 17-55mm and 10-22mm) as they wanted you to move up. In this case the R6 is my camera of choice, it costs more but the benefits outweight all that vs the R7. If Canon treated it as a high end body on par with the R5, just a crop camera it would be far more popular as I know many wildlife photographers that have been waiting for this camera only to be disappointed by all the shortcomings.
@@SawShotShared The R7 AF has nothing like the ability of the R3. Nor the R5 come to that. It's a cut down version but no way comparable in performance. It has a puny buffer, dog slow sensor read out (double that of the R5 and almost four times slower than the R3) making the ES almost useless. Canon had the chance to set the benchmark for crop sensor mirrorless and blew it with an old recycled sensor.
Fairly good review but unfortunately I now know you are a very bias reviewer. I think you should just review Fujifilm as it really is obvious that is your camera brand of choice.
Any bias you are perceiving is your own. I have been a professional journalist testing cameras for 30 years now - longer than most here - and believe me, you don't last this long if you're biased. I have learned to present the pros and cons of each system and recommend what they can and cannot do. Did you come here looking for a sycophantic advert about the R7, full of only praise and no critique? Sorry, I don't do that, you're better off looking for a Canon ambassador if you only want to hear positive things. The simple fact is right now, Fujifilm has the two most powerful APSC cameras on the market and they outclass the R7 in most - but not all - specs, as well as having a more established lens system designed for APSC. But as I repeatedly pointed out, they are also a LOT more expensive, 50% more for the X-H2 and around $1000 more for the X-H2S. That puts them in a different class where you'd expect them to be better-specced. As I pointed out, the R7 is a solid choice for the money, but don't kid yourself that it's the best APSC camera out there at any price or that Canon has a positive history in APSC lenses.
Thanks for replying. I’ve been a follower of yours for most of those 30 years. It’s just that I’ve noticed this over time. I know the R7 is far from a perfect camera but I like Canon’s colour science versus Fujifilm. When I was using film or slides myself and family always chose Kodak over Fujifilm for that very reason. Fuji always seemed to boost colours and made them look unnatural. Then again it’s a personal choice. All I know is I’m extremely happy with my R6 and recently purchased R7.
@@bradgreen5860 that's the most important thing. It's easy for me to compare specs and tell you which is most powerful at a certain job BUT if you prefer the look and feel or certain bodies and in particular the images they create, then that takes priority. Glad you're happy with your system. Look out for lots of RF lens reviews coming soon!
I have one simple question to ask. I’m looking for a prime for general indoor lower light settings and possibly a walk around lens other than my zooms. I’m looking at the Canon RF 35 1.8 or possibly the Tamron 45 1.8 DI VC. What is your opinion between the two. Thank you for your reply also. As of right now I don’t own a prime lens. Thanks Gordon and have yourself a great day.
@@bradgreen5860 I've not personally tested the Tamron, but I have the Canon and it's one of their best budget RF lenses, ideal for full-frame or APSC. I'd get that one.
