Will the Fujifilm X-T6 and Canon EOS R7 Mark II face off in the 2026 APS-C Showdown?

It always comes back to, how big? If the segment wasn't worth targeting over the last few years, why would it be now? (Largely rhetorical questions).
Possibly because the overall market isn't nearly as big as it was (thanks in large part to phones with cameras), but I doubt the birder segment has shrunk, so it could be relatively a bigger chunk of the current market. We shall see. In the meantime, I really like my R7.
 
Upvote 0
Possibly because the overall market isn't nearly as big as it was (thanks in large part to phones with cameras), but I doubt the birder segment has shrunk, so it could be relatively a bigger chunk of the current market. We shall see. In the meantime, I really like my R7.
An interesting suggestion! I came close to getting an R7 more than once, it was a rare bargain in the lineup.
 
Upvote 0
An interesting suggestion! I came close to getting an R7 more than once, it was a rare bargain in the lineup.
The R10 is also a very good value. I steered a neighbor to one and he loves it. Very compact, but quite capable, only missing IBIS, but not a big issue for those using APS-c lenses with IS. He has the 18-150, the 10-18, and the 100-400. Very lightweight kit with a 40:1 zoom range and all the lenses are quite sharp at 24 MP. Sensor has DR almost identical to the R7.

I use my R7 primarily with the 200-800 for my hummingbirds. For travel and portability, I still take the M6 II as I have all the M lenses. Just wish it had EFCS.
 
Upvote 0
The R10 is also a very good value. I steered a neighbor to one and he loves it. Very compact, but quite capable, only missing IBIS, but not a big issue for those using APS-c lenses with IS. He has the 18-150, the 10-18, and the 100-400. Very lightweight kit with a 40:1 zoom range and all the lenses are quite sharp at 24 MP. Sensor has DR almost identical to the R7.

I use my R7 primarily with the 200-800 for my hummingbirds. For travel and portability, I still take the M6 II as I have all the M lenses. Just wish it had EFCS.
I’m hoping it gets cheaper when the R7 MKII drops!

Off topic, but do you find 700-800mm usable at all?

I’m deal hunting a telephoto, but I’ve heard atmospheric distortion makes 800 + crop too much.
 
Upvote 0
I’m hoping it gets cheaper when the R7 MKII drops!

Off topic, but do you find 700-800mm usable at all?

I’m deal hunting a telephoto, but I’ve heard atmospheric distortion makes 800 + crop too much.
Yes, very long lenses can produce excellent results if you choose your conditions carefully. I have the RF 200-800, the RF 800 f/11, and the EF 800 f/5.6 L and use them all. My primary use is photographing hummingbirds, and that is close up work were atmospheric distortion is minimal. Long range shots require patience. Depending on where you live, the air can vary from never being clear to really good visibility about 30% of the time, so for clear distance shots, you need to be aware of "seeing conditions", as the astro folks call it, and be prepared when conditions are right. Note that 800mm on an R7 is equivalent to 1280 mm on an equivalent MP FF and very close to 1120 mm (i.e. a 1.4 extender) when comparing to an R5.

Below are some examples. The first was shot with a Canon SL2 attached to the EF 800 f.6L with a 2x III extender, so 1600mm and a 1.6 crop factor or 2560 mm equivalent FF. Image is a 100% crop. Bird is about 80 ft from the camera. The second was shot with an R7 and the RF 200-800 at 800mm at about 15 ft distance. Also a 100% crop. The last shot was with an R5 and the RF 800mm f/11. The first image is substantially unprocessed and scaled to fit the site. The second is a processed 100% crop. This shows that "good" seeing conditions are not always what you might think. That day was hazy, but temperatures were very even, so there was little thermal distortion, and as you can see, the camera saw a lot more detail than eye and it was recoverable with proper processing. The rock is about a mile and a half away from the camera. Often, what looks like a beautiful, clear day is actually not as clear as it looks because there are often severe thermal distortions that will, ruin long distance photos. The quickest way to get the feel of the day is to shoot a short video at the desired distance and watch for wiggle and squirm (i.e. jellyfishing) in the image. If the video is bad, stills will be bad, too.



IMG_1765-Edit-4.jpg

E57A1770_DxO-Edit.jpg

2W4A5423.jpg


2W4A5423-Edit.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0