In this video I break down the differences between the full-frame R6 and the APS-C R7 when using these cameras for wildlife and macro photography as well as 4k video!
Thanks man I’m trying to get better with the edits and getting straight to the point! Thank you for watching and the compliments I really appreciate it.
There should be more videos like yours. Short, clear messages, free from self-presentation. I liked those nice pictures you have chosen to underline your opinion. Good job! I' ll be back on your channel.
Great video and extremely helpful! One question: what shutter mode are you shooting in, and have you experienced rolling shutter when using electronic shutter? Thanks again for the awesome review
I primarily use the mechanical shutter mode to avoid the rolling shutter effect. The R7 has pretty slow read out speeds so when using electronic shutter it can be a problem with some fast moving subjects like bird wings when birds are in flight. Larger birds like hawks and eagles it’s usually not an issue. Hope this helps a bit and thank you for watching the channel!
Stumbled over this channel but now subscribed. Absolutely bang on about the R7 and noise. It's a great camera but here in 55°N UK iso 1600/3200 is the limit. What it needs is a better lens ie with a wider aperture than the f7.1 from the 100-500 we all bought. A 200-600 f6.3 would be great 👍🇬🇧
I also have the R6 and R7 and agree with your findings, plus you have highlighted some uses I haven't tried yet. The only thing I'd say about the R7 is that it is low light you need to watch out for rather than high iso as such. I have used very high iso in very good light and got excellent results from the R7. Conversely, in very low light, 6400 would be too much. I think this is because iso is an idea we keep from film cameras whereas with digital it's really all about the absolute amount of light we have. Anyway, thanks!
Hey man and thank you so much really happy to hear you enjoyed the video! You bring up some interring points and you’re correct the ISO value that can be pulled off is definitely higher when the scene is well lit. Appreciate you watching and adding you thoughts hope to hear from you more in the future!
One point: I don't like the in-camera stacking feature for two reasons: First, it delivers the results as a JPG while doing the stack manually from the Focus Bracketed series allows you to get a TIF file which is better for further postprocessing (tones, crops, local dodge/burn). The later in the process that you go down to lossy, 8-bit JPG, the better. Second, using the in-camera stacking requires you to pick the correct number and spacing of images before you compile them into a finished image. When I do a focus series I try to err on the side of shooting too many starting and stopping closer and further than needed so I can review the series and delete images that do not contribute to the desired effect. In many cases, I find that having everything sharp is not really desirable so I might shoot a series one through twenty and end up stacking only numbers two through fifteen. There are even cases where you might delete images in the middle. If an ant makes a dash across your flower and appears only in a couple frames, you can omit the one that makes an overlapped ant in the scene. Yes, doing JPG's in camera is 'easier' but only if 'better' is not as important for that shoot and you know in advance that 'good enough' is the desired result.
I agree with everything here. It is a somewhat limited feature compared to good old fashioned manual stacking but it’s nice to be able to bang something out quickly with a lot less effort sometimes. I end up processing so many images sometimes the manual process could take forever so like you said when the desired outcome is a good enough shot that will be sufficient for the client it’s cool to have the option available. Thanks for always watching and commenting Doug I always appreciate hearing form you I can tell you know what you’re taking about. Thank you!
@@raptor-pm3it Yes. There are three 'levels' of focus stacking available. First and IMO least is the fully auto one that produces a JPG in camera. Second and very useful for landscapes and reasonable close macro (not extreme) is using the focus bracketing but NOT the in camera compilation. Compile in DPP4 (or other s/w of your choice) Save this as a 16bit TIFF and finish in your chosen software. Last, and best for close macro of non-moving subjects, is exposing the series moving the camera minutely closer with each shot from front to back and making the composite in the software of your choice (I use DPP4 or Affinity Photo) and save as TIFF's until ready to make a final JPG. This last one gives complete control but requires a little more practice and use of a focus rail ($20 to $2000?). I do not want the level of automation of the first method; the second requires autofocus lenses and some of my best glass is manual and adapted (Laowa!!!, Leitz, Zeiss, whatever). If Canon issued a really complete instruction book on these cameras the thing would be out of date before a speed reader could finish it. Practice!
Wow, I agree with just about everything you said here, especially how you compared to r7 to the full frame bodies. Right in the money. I have two r5s but I still use the r7 when I want that reach but also have really good light. Yep, AF is not as good as r5/r6, but it is still very good. I love it for macro for all the reasons you mention, even though it does not seem to work well with my godox twin flash system (i think a firmware update is needed). What flash are you using? Anyway, excellent review. Keep up the good work.
Hey thanks so much man really appreciate the positive comments! I’m using the godox MF-12 flash now and I really like it. I was using the godox TT685c flash before this one and it worked well but I like having the flash on front of the lens a lot better now. Thanks again for watching and if you ever have any other questions always feel free to ask me anything I’ll always help if I can!
Your video was excellent and very helpful. I currently have the 5D MIV with two L lenses (24-105 and 100-400 II). I have wanted to move to R6 II or R5 for eye focus and full frame. However as you pointed out the reach with 1.6 crop is hard to overlook. I currently can best go with the R7 now and have Great reach with my current L lenses. I plan to keep my 5D MIV. I do not have unlimited funds for telephoto lens and the 1.6 crop with 32 Megapixels should be very nice for my wildlife needs. In time I can see the price of the R3 lowering and by then I may even own better RF lens. Also know I never thought the large file sizes of the R5 would be that good for my needs. Thanks for helping me decide for now on the purchase of the R7.
Let me just put it this way... I owned the Canon R5 for a full year. Took thousands of great shots with it. It was my first mirrorless and WoW ! That Eye Auto Focus :) + 45 mp's ! Then I rented an R7. Loved it so much I ordered one of my own before I even returned the rental ! After about a month of shooting with the R7 every day... probably took 30K photos with it, I tried to go back to my R5 (felt guilty leaving a $4K camera to sit on my dresser) and after one test outing.... Nope ! It felt heavy, the MS shutter which I always used, because I hated the dead silent ES) was annoying, and most importantly, I was getting more consistently good shots with the R7. So, I sold my R5 to get another R7 + the RF 100-400 + some other peripherals (yes, I know the RF 100-500 is a better lens, but I so rarely shoot this close and wide, so not worth the $2900, for me personally) Never even considered that the R7 might be outstanding for Macro, which is actually another genre that I've considered getting more serious with for a long time :) So that's cool. Might have to get me a nice macro lens with some of my R5 money too :)
Last year I got a Nikon P1000 at first I didn't give it much chance, but today I take pictures of course I don't want to compare here with an R7 but it will make me not buy an R7 but an R8 because for wildlife I started to consider the P1000, hehehe . .. without the P1000 I would buy the R7 but I will consider that I already have a wildlife camera (magnificent zoom) and I will buy a FF which has amazing images! Ahhh.. the P1000 is not a highly recommended camera but I take pictures of birds that even the 90D + Sigma 600mm never gave me! All this considering I don't print my photos, I only use them on short media, but her photos also look very good on a big screen (50p tv). Thanks for the video brother it made me think “if the R6 is excellent in image quality imagine the R8 or R6II” 🤔
Good review! For me 8-10k ISO is more than fine despite the minor loss of detail, especially if I'm not over cropping. Like you said, it's preference. 10k is the tipping point where I'll definitely lower my shutter if I can. For large prints, obviously they wouldn't be the best, but even on my 43 inch 4k monitor it still looks pretty good to me eyes, obviously just a preference, my threshold for usable is probably higher than you. And for social media, I've gotten decent shots at 20k. But like you said, that's for social media only, and as long as you don't overcrop. But it's good to know it still does okay for social media if that's important for you 🙂 All very good info, great job and thanks for posting. Agree with the AF, buffer and the woes of pre capture mode. Also, rolling shutter for me is the true deal breaker for pre-capture. I can go past the buffer issue in pre-capture by only doing really short bursts (since I only care about that 1/2s before, obviously depends on what you shoot), but the rolling shutter is just too bad in the scenarios where pre-capture could be usable for me. Even when the wings aren't too deformed, it just never looks as good as mechanical for action. Maybe it's the reduced bit rate?
Hey man and thank you for watching the video! Great comment. The lower bit rate definitely could be why you’re noticing lower quality images in electronic shutter mode because they are technically lower quality images. Thank you again for watching and I look forward to hearing more from you as you seem to have good insight into things! Have a great day man.
I use canon M6 II with sigma 15600 C and with/without viltrox speedbooster so I have ""fullframe" camera when light is bad and long reach when light is good. Costs are much much lower than r6/r7 combo :))). I use RAW burs mode which gave me 1.3x extra crop when I use speedbooster...18Mpix gave me plenty of detail also. SD card V90 is must have for M6II or R7 of course.
Great video! Thank you for this! I’m thinking about getting the R7 but I just don’t know if I should save up for the R6? Mostly shoot Offroad videos for my channel but have been getting into shooting my sons soccer games. Do you think the AF with R6 and R7 with an adapted EF 70-200 f2.8 would be fast enough? Thanks! - Geoff
Oh yeah the AF on both the R6 and R7 are very fast and accurate. I still feel the R6 is a bit better at tracking and hands down for high ISO performance the R6 is way better. I really prefer the R6 over my R7 except for the extra reach factor you get on the R7 for wildlife. The R6 has more flexible RAW files and I don’t now I just feel it takes better images even with the lower 20mp sensor. As far as the EF 70-200 it should perform well adapted onto either the 7 or 6. Hope that helps a little bit and thanks so much for watching and commenting!
@@PPNJ thanks a bunch! Great video. You should do more like this. I started out filming my off-roading videos with my iPhone but then ran into storage issues and I wanted a zoom lens. I picked up a Canon M50 and really enjoyed it and got into shooting my sons soccer games and now I’m addicted. I really want that IBIS and the amazing 4K footage! And better tracking for shooting sports. I don’t shoot wildlife at all so maybe the R6 is the way to go! Thanks again!
@@Colorado4x4 don’t forget they just released the R6 mark ii at the same price as the R6 $2500 in my opinion you may do better with full frame. I really prefer full frame for video and even sports/action shots. Good luck with whatever you decide and thanks again.
Regarding macro I use flash if I have to especially with high mag shots using MP-E65 but natural light is much better looking for macro generally and the IBIS should help a lot in this respect against the Canon DSLR s
Oddly enough, I watched this video despite owning both -- mostly because I was curious how others have experienced this. I mostly got the R6 for small bird photography, because the R7 wasn't released yet; two years later I ordered the R7 as soon as it was released. But I can't bring myself to give up the R6... I find myself doing a lot of travel photography and occasional family portraits, and the FF sensor just excels at that. I took both with me birding last week, intending to use the R6 for closer subjects and the R7 just when I needed reach... but I realized I only had one good battery, so it was the R7 I picked. I do agree I think the R6 seems to nail focus a little better. But maybe it's just the more demanding high-resolution sensor on the R7 that makes the difference? I haven't decided yet.
Did you say you used the 100-400 lens for this treatise? Is that the budget Canon lens? I have R6 and R7 but my go to lens in this range is the RF 100-500 F4. Just curious how much that shift would have influenced your super review.
Yes I used the Canon RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 and also the Tamron EF 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 on some of the wildlife images. Unfortunately I haven't gotten my hands on a RF 100-500 yet I dream about it and hope to someday have that lens.I'm sure the L series glass only improves the AF even more for both bodies. Thanks so much for commenting and watching the video I really appreciate it!
Hi do you recommend the R7 for product video and indoor content, i.e. apartment films, etc. I can't decide between R7 or Sony A7iii. Since I will use the cam for the next years, and it's both a huge investment.
Hello I’m not a Sony guy but the a7iii is full frame I believe. I’m a big fan of full frame especially for indoors (wider field of view) and for video. Full frame performs better at high iso values which means it will perform better indoors when light isn’t great. Honestly it sounds like you should go full frame based on your needs. Hope that helps a little.
I wish the AF of the R7 was more reliable. When it works it's spot on but I have found it to be inconsistent if there isn't enough "good light". The R6 AF performances destroys the R7, nailing fast moving subjects in low light with near perfect accuracy.
Yeah FB can make it hard. I have found using PNG files instead of JPG files gets way better results on social media though. I haven’t had issues on social media once I switched to using PNG. I mean there’s always some compression that will happen when you upload but that does help a lot. Appreciate you watching the channel. Thank you!
Do EF mount lenses built for aps-c cameras, like my current T7i with Canon EF 70-300mm IS II lens get the 1.6 crop, or only lenses that were for full frame cameras? I am trying to decide R7 vs R6 Mk II for wildlife?
