Latest activity
The Canon EOS R7 Mark II is in the Wild
- By AlanF
- EOS Bodies
- 105 Replies
Canon is now tending to remove the AA-fillter in just one direction, the vertical, and retain it in the horizontal. You can see the difference it makes in these downloads of charts from optyczne.pl of the R50 (larger chart) and R100 - the difference is clear in the vertical lines, where there is Moiré for the R100. The R100 does have better resolution (~95 vs ~85 lp/mm at the highest measured).
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R7 Mark II is in the Wild
- EOS Bodies
- 105 Replies
i kind like that idea / sprit ;-)If people keep joking about the R100 I might just get one. Just to take great pics and post here or maybe I'll make a questionnaire: R100 or R5 out of it
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
The Coming Canon ‘Retro’ Camera to Use Latest 32.5MP Sensor
- By erader
- EOS Bodies
- 89 Replies
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R7 Mark II is in the Wild
- By SnowMiku
- EOS Bodies
- 105 Replies
My old 700D has the red info screen feature! My M5 also has a night mode LCD colour. When I got my 90D I messaged Canon saying I can't find this option and they said it doesn't have it
I have no idea why they would even remove it.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R7 Mark II is in the Wild
- By AlanF
- EOS Bodies
- 105 Replies
I shoot only stills, and you don't mention the most important feature of the good mirrorless - superb tracking and rapid autofocus. If all you are doing is stills of nearly static large animals, then the old generation of Canon DSLRs were superb - I used a 5Div and 5DSR for a very satisfying safari in Tanzania. If you are doing birds in flight or getting good eye-AF on a far distant one, then an R5/R6 series blow them away as well as the R1/R3. And, despite negative comments from some, the R7 beats the 7Dii.That's because the R100 is incredible for safari stills!
If I only did stills, I wouldn't even look at R mirrorless cameras. Most advantages are for video shooting, or "ergonomic" features like more reliable autofocus, high ISO, IBIS, more resolution for cropping, HDR HEIFs and such.
But for SDR social media JPEGs? Old bodies are amazing at that.
These are uncropped frames I took in Tanzania in 2025. I picked a few "suboptimal" situations with weird lighting, moving animals, shooting from a moving vehicle and such. You know, things you'd presumably need a fancy camera to compensate for. And my technique was pretty awful:
Those were taken on a 2008 Rebel XS (1000D), and a 50-250mm IS II. That's like a thrift store camera these days!
Would I have made more good shots on an R1? Or my new R50V? ...Yeah.
But for web-bound safari jpegs, it really not that different from a 1000D. Avoiding some technical mistakes I made would have made a much bigger difference.
What's more, I can process all these raws to HDR JXL photos. From a 2008 camera! Ironically, the internet hasn't even caught up to such ancient hardware (as CanonRumors won't let me upload any HDR files).
***
Point I'm trying to make is, for stills, the volume of criticism for budget bodies like the R100 is definitely unwarranted.
Being a little cramped can be lived with on a budget. But on the other hand, the R10 does feel "neither here nor there." Not uber compact like the R50/R50V, yet not big enough to feel ergonomic like the R8/R7.
The R50V is a fantastic "carry around" stills camera, FYI. Even if I didn't shoot video, I wouldn't even think of trading it for an R50 or R10.
I would do unspeakable things for an R7V though. Shrink the R7, take away the EVF, keep the IBIS, and I'd be in heaven.
Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R7 Mark II is in the Wild
- By EthenJ
- EOS Bodies
- 105 Replies
That's because the R100 is incredible for safari stills!
If I only did stills, I wouldn't even look at R mirrorless cameras. Most advantages are for video shooting, or "ergonomic" features like more reliable autofocus, high ISO, IBIS, more resolution for cropping, HDR HEIFs and such.
But for SDR social media JPEGs? Old bodies are amazing at that.
These are uncropped frames I took in Tanzania in 2025. I picked a few "suboptimal" situations with weird lighting, moving animals, shooting from a moving vehicle and such. You know, things you'd presumably need a fancy camera to compensate for. And my technique was pretty awful:
Those were taken on a 2008 Rebel XS (1000D), and a 50-250mm IS II. That's like a thrift store camera these days!
Would I have made more good shots on an R1? Or my new R50V? ...Yeah.
But for web-bound safari jpegs, it really not that different from a 1000D. Avoiding some technical mistakes I made would have made a much bigger difference.
What's more, I can process all these raws to HDR JXL photos. From a 2008 camera! Ironically, the internet hasn't even caught up to such ancient hardware (as CanonRumors won't let me upload any HDR files).
***
Point I'm trying to make is, for stills, the volume of criticism for budget bodies like the R100 is definitely unwarranted.
Being a little cramped can be lived with on a budget. But on the other hand, the R10 does feel "neither here nor there." Not uber compact like the R50/R50V, yet not big enough to feel ergonomic like the R8/R7.
The R50V is a fantastic "carry around" stills camera, FYI. Even if I didn't shoot video, I wouldn't even think of trading it for an R50 or R10.
I would do unspeakable things for an R7V though. Shrink the R7, take away the EVF, keep the IBIS, and I'd be in heaven.
Upvote
0
Filter
Forum statistics
Gallery statistics
- Categories
- 1
- Albums
- 29
- Uploaded media
- 372
- Embedded media
- 1
- Comments
- 25
- Disk usage
- 1 GB