Canon officially announces the Canon EOS R7, Canon EOS R10 and two new RF-S lenses

[gruhl28]

I'm wondering why the 18-45 isn't available packaged with the R7. Maybe Canon figures someone spending the money on an R7 wouldn't want such an inexpensive lens, but it looks much smaller than the 18-150 and surely some people would want a smaller walk-around lens. Personally, I like general zooms that go down to 24 mm FF equivalent (15 mm on Canon APS-C) but Canon seems to have given up on going wider than 18 mm for the wide end of their APS-C general zoom lenses - nothing since the 17-85 and 15-85 EF-S from quite a few years ago.

 

[lote82]

The R7 price makes the R3 look very expensive

The R7 price makes my wife a Canon fangirl (and she's not even photographing)!

 

[AlanF]

Pre-ordered my R7! Comes shipped with the adapter in box.

Wex are doing 2 x Lexar 128GB Professional 1800x 270MB/Sec UHS-II V60 SDXC for £49.50 with the R7 too! Nod a bad deal!

Done the same. The cards are the V60 1667x. Bryan from TDP used those in his tests and I have with the R5. If you are shooting in cRAW, they are good enough for most stills. Some would like twin CFExpress slots, but they add a huge extra cost to a £1300 camera.

 

[reefroamer]

Question: Can the rear LCD screen on the R7 be used for touch focus?

 

[reefroamer]

Eventually, Canon is likely to offer an affordable ultrawide RF-S lens, but in the meantime there is the option to use the very good and cheap EF-S 10-18 with the Ef-RF adapter on both of these new bodies.

 

[HikeBike]

A few observations:
- I very much like the AF/MF switch on the front of the R7, given that some of the new, less expensive RF lenses don't have a focus mode switch on them.
- I think I like the idea of a dial being around the joystick on the R7. Would have to see what it's really like to use though.
- Very surprised there's no top dial on the R7. Not cool.
- Canon is allowing video recordings longer than 30 mins! As far as I know, this still isn't possible on the R5/R6 (I haven't attempted it lately), but I'd expect a firmware update for them to also get this feature.
- I'm pleasantly surprised by the pricing of both the R7 and R10.

 

[Jasonmc89]

Buffer seems quite small at 30 FPS. 30-40images in raw before you notice lag.

Done the same. The cards are the V60 1667x. Bryan from TDP used those in his tests and I have with the R5. If you are shooting in cRAW, they are good enough for most stills. Some would like twin CFExpress slots, but they add a huge extra cost to a £1300 camera.

I’m not bothered about the lack of CFExpress cards! But then again I’m a stills only shooter and I know I’ll hardly ever clog up the buffer shooting the kind of things I do. Also I’d much rather have 2 matching slots opposed to one of each. The guy at Wex said shipping is due to start next month, so hopefully not too long of a wait!

 

[AlanF]

I’m not bothered about the lack of CFExpress cards! But then again I’m a stills only shooter and I know I’ll hardly ever clog up the buffer shooting the kind of things I do. Also I’d much rather have 2 matching slots opposed to one of each. The guy at Wex said shipping is due to start next month, so hopefully not too long of a wait!

What time did you phone them? I did at about 9 am, and the guy didn't know then. canon.jp says end of next month and as WEX are taking payment now I guess that could be for real.

 

[Jasonmc89]

For those looking for a mirrorless version of the 90D or xxxD/Rebel, I’m happy. The R7 and R10 for those needs.

The skimpy buffer, weaker weather sealing and lack of a battery grip mean the R7 isn’t a mirrorless 7-series despite the badge. No doubt many will find the compromises acceptable.

I’d bet Canon will release a battery grip for both the R7 and the R10, in the same way that the grip for the R5 fits the R6. I’ll be honest though, the moment after I placed my order I was Googling “Canon R7 battery grip”

 

[Jasonmc89]

What time did you phone them? I did at about 9 am, and the guy didn't know then. canon.jp says end of next month and as WEX are taking payment now I guess that could be for real.

Just checked my phone, 09:51 I called them!

 

[InchMetric]

Much cheaper than I expected. I was consider a 90D a couple of years ago, and if my trade-in ever actually completes I'll have to think hard about the R7 versus the R5/6. Although it would feel a little weird going back to APS-C after all these years...

Feels expensive compared to full frame RP but they seem to be able to charge a premium for processor speed.

 

[AlP]

Eventually, Canon is likely to offer an affordable ultrawide RF-S lens, but in the meantime there is the option to use the very good and cheap EF-S 10-18 with the Ef-RF adapter on both of these new bodies.

Since the RF 18-150 is a repackaged EF-M 18-150, there's hope that Canon will repackage the EF-M 11-22 as well. That's a great lens, optically excellent and not only for the size and price.
And while they're at that, they could also do the same treatment for the EF-M 32 mm, which I think is one of Canon's best lenses. But there's already a relatively cheap 35 mm in RF mount, so they might not add a similar focal length to RF-S

 

[Jasonmc89]

Feels expensive compared to full frame RP but they seem to be able to charge a premium for processor speed.

There’s a lot of stuff in the R7 that the RP doesn’t have. RP is a very basic camera really. It’s not all about sensor size.

 

[Z-06]

It feels like Canon is run by General Motors accountants. It does the same flubs of lack of attention to details like GM's pencil pushers are famous for; just look at the bottomline without looking at what consumers want. To me R7 does not feel like a 7D Mirrorless replacement, like R5 is to 5D.

1. Weather sealing deficiencies
2. Small buffer
3. No battery grip option
4. Lack of LCD on top
5. Only SD cards capability

This is more of a mirrorless Rebel+, than a prosumer 7D was. I wonder what the capital outlay decision was to have the camera in the body of a R5 with a higher price than making its own body and eliminating the features above with a lower price. Because I am certain prosumers would have shelled money for it, for those features even if it would have been $500 to $700 higher. If my memory serves correct, 6D and 7D were on price parity targeting different clientele. I was hoping the same with R6 and R7.

 

[pererik_2000]

It looks to me the R7 is the 90D-successor with better autofocus and IBIS which I wanted. The price is also quite reasonable, I will continue with my EF-S lenses until there is something better, especially I am waiting for a 15-70+ zoom .

 

[-pekr-]

A few observations:
- I very much like the AF/MF switch on the front of the R7, given that some of the new, less expensive RF lenses don't have a focus mode switch on them.
- I think I like the idea of a dial being around the joystick on the R7. Would have to see what it's really like to use though.
- Very surprised there's no top dial on the R7. Not cool.
- Canon is allowing video recordings longer than 30 mins! As far as I know, this still isn't possible on the R5/R6 (I haven't attempted it lately), but I'd expect a firmware update for them to also get this feature.
- I'm pleasantly surprised by the pricing of both the R7 and R10.

I have personally expected R7 being a real continuation of the 7DII. A solid R5 like body, with just APS-C sensor and lower specs on the video eventually. I know that companies want to innovate and test things, but that (to me useless, as was a print button) AF/MF button and the joystick / wheel hybrid, should be imo introduced on the R10 instead - a much less important body. It will either prevail, or be gone like the R touch bar.

As for the "unlocking" the R5/R6 video time limit - I can see it mentioned quite often. I think it will not actually happen. FF sensor size and R5/R6 internal design might be different to the APS-C based design of the R7. If it would be safe to do so, Canon would imo did it already ...

 

[speg]

To give an example of size ... you can fit 2 M6's in the space of 1 R10.

Camera	Length (mm)	Width (mm)	Depth (mm)	Volume (mm3)	Weight (g)
R10	122.5	87.8	83.4	897,008.7	429
M6	112	68	44.5	338,912	390
M6 Mark II	119	70	49.5	465,349.5	361

Is that accurate though? I suspect much of that depth is from the grip, which obviously doesn’t extend across the length of the body.

 

[Marphoto]

Any more word on the af capabilities? This is cheap as hell and if it performs, what a go to WL camera.

 

[blackcoffee17]

To give an example of size ... you can fit 2 M6's in the space of 1 R10.

Camera	Length (mm)	Width (mm)	Depth (mm)	Volume (mm3)	Weight (g)
R10	122.5	87.8	83.4	897,008.7	429
M6	112	68	44.5	338,912	390
M6 Mark II	119	70	49.5	465,349.5	361

That is not exactly correct, because the depth is only 83mm because of the grip.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I’d bet Canon will release a battery grip for both the R7 and the R10, in the same way that the grip for the R5 fits the R6. I’ll be honest though, the moment after I placed my order I was Googling “Canon R7 battery grip”

From the TDP review: "Is battery grip available for the Canon EOS R7? Unfortunately, no, and the grip positioning holes are not provided." That certainly suggests your bet on the future release of a grip for the R7 would be unwise. One more piece of evidence that the R7 is not the 'pro-grade' 7-series camera for which some were hoping.