Canon officially announces the Canon EOS R7, Canon EOS R10 and two new RF-S lenses
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Disappointed.
Was hoping for a pro-level wildlife/sports body based on the R6, but it seems that Canon have elected to make it a prosumer 90D replacement.
The swipe bar on the original R was considered awkward and too easy to operate accidentally, and I have a horrible feeling that Canon have fallen into the same "experimental" trap again by putting a huge control ring around the AF joystick on the R7.
The low resolution EVF and rear screen are also mistakes IMO.
Was hoping for a pro-level wildlife/sports body based on the R6, but it seems that Canon have elected to make it a prosumer 90D replacement.
The swipe bar on the original R was considered awkward and too easy to operate accidentally, and I have a horrible feeling that Canon have fallen into the same "experimental" trap again by putting a huge control ring around the AF joystick on the R7.
The low resolution EVF and rear screen are also mistakes IMO.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
I think the R7 sounds like a nice camera and reasonable merger of the 7DII and 90D. Given the price, the compromises of the R7 seem quite acceptable.
To add a little perspective, you can get an R7 and an R5 for less than the price of an R3. If you are not a sports shooter the combination may be a better value.
Personally, the lack of a battery grip is no big deal to me. I have a grip for the R5 and never use it and I find the R3 to be a bit of a brick with its integrated grip (I realize others have different opinions, but that's mine).
I am perplexed by the R10. I'm not sure what niche it fills, other than to upsell buyers to the R7, RP or R. It seems too expensive for what it is and too stripped down for its price point.
To add a little perspective, you can get an R7 and an R5 for less than the price of an R3. If you are not a sports shooter the combination may be a better value.
Personally, the lack of a battery grip is no big deal to me. I have a grip for the R5 and never use it and I find the R3 to be a bit of a brick with its integrated grip (I realize others have different opinions, but that's mine).
I am perplexed by the R10. I'm not sure what niche it fills, other than to upsell buyers to the R7, RP or R. It seems too expensive for what it is and too stripped down for its price point.
Upvote
0
Stop being sarcastic and learn to have a decent conversation!
That's the advantage of the stacked sensor and not BSI. Two totally different things. Yes, most stacked sensors are also BSI but BSI alone has barely any advantage in image quality department. The fast readout is made possible by the memory embedded in the sensor.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
For me, it fills the niche for those wanting the advanced AF system of the R7, and a reasonably high FPS for bird and wildlife photography, but looking for a small and light kit. Pre-ordered this am and will pair it with my RF 100-400 for a small and light combo that saves me $500 compared to the R7. R7 is definitely tempting though and may ultimately be the better deal, but will try the R10 first and see if it meets my needs. Don't need IBIS with this lens, 2 card slots would be nice, but not worth the additional money.
Upvote
0
Durf
Picture Taker - Image Maker
For me, these two camera's are Canon's most boring releases that I can ever remember....
I got tired of waiting for a 7D Mark III and if this R7 is its replacement, it's basically a step backwards in my opinion. The 7D Mark II is a beast and this R7 really looks "toyish" compared to it.
Seems to me the R7 is just a beefed up Rebel camera, not sure what to compare the R10 to!
I got tired of waiting for a 7D Mark III and if this R7 is its replacement, it's basically a step backwards in my opinion. The 7D Mark II is a beast and this R7 really looks "toyish" compared to it.
Seems to me the R7 is just a beefed up Rebel camera, not sure what to compare the R10 to!
Upvote
0
Basically, it means more pixels on duck. Cropping the R5's 45mp to APS-C size gives ~17mp. To have an equivalent full frame sensor would mean >80mp which would be difficult to have a high fps to suit sports shooters (R1 may prove me wrong!)
Other advantages are:
- working distance ie you can be further away shooting the same subject if they are prone to move if too close
- cheaper lenses for reach eg using a 70-200mm /2.8 instead of a ~300mm/2.8 (or 300mm/4) prime. Focal length flexibility in this case as well. With EF mount, a EF70-200mm + TCs gave huge flexibility but RF70-200mm doesn't accept TCs. 400mm instead of 600mm etc.
- a niche specialty is underwater macro where you can get 100mm focal length from a much smaller EF-s 60mm macro and smaller bodies
- cheaper sensor as the good sensors per wafer should be higher
- in theory, the higher pixel density should have lower rolling shutter ie 32mp APS-C is less sensor lines to read than the 17mp crop on the R5's 45mp unless the crop mode on the R5 only reads from the crop sensor lines
In the past, the downside for higher pixel density was poorer high ISO performance but the correlation doesn't seem to be as strong now.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
It cuts the extra SD card and IBIS at a price that affords an extra lens. It also doesn't have full sensor 4k 60 but reviews show the feature is pixel binned on the R7 and it's sharper to use crop mode anyway, which the R10 is better for.
The tracking is the same and they both take excellent pictures.
I'd consider getting the R10, but I'd prefer something that can replace my M200. Maybe I'll get an R10 next year after a price drop.
Upvote
0
That’s a fair point of a technical nature. The bigger picture is that the sensor in the R7 is neither BSI nor stacked. therefore, rolling shutter as illustrated in the image I posted will still be a problem with the R7. Whether it affects your images will depend on what you shoot. Most sports have a ball that is round. With birds, it would likely be unnoticeable. Then again, 15 FPS is not slouching.
Upvote
0
Same here. I’m also wondering how often I hit the stupid on off switch that is in place of the aperture dial on my r5. I was hoping to be able to seamlessly switch between the r5 and r7 like you can with the r5/6. I figured the r7 was going to take the same vertical grip and everything. It seems very strange to me that canon decided to change the ergonomics on this camera in order to save a couple of grams and mm. Especially when this camera is just begging to be paired with a large telephoto lens
Upvote
0
Glad to see they added a sound option to the E-shutter. I always found the R5's silent shutter with no option for an artificial shutter sound disconcerting.
What burst rates are available in E-shutter mode? I have never shot 30fps even on cameras that have the option. However, shooting at 20-25fps would be a nice alternative to 30fps. Also, are all Canon lenses capable of shooting 30fps? On Sony, the 30fps option came with lots of disclaimers and caveats.
What burst rates are available in E-shutter mode? I have never shot 30fps even on cameras that have the option. However, shooting at 20-25fps would be a nice alternative to 30fps. Also, are all Canon lenses capable of shooting 30fps? On Sony, the 30fps option came with lots of disclaimers and caveats.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
The RP shutter is fingernails on the chalkboard.The 15FPS with the Mechanical shutter will be helpful for these situations. Can't say I am a fan of the sound of the shutter based on Kai W's preview vid. Sounds a lot like the RP shutter that I hated
Upvote
0
The buffer on the R10 and R7 is actually very good on jpg with the mechanical shutter. The R10 @ 15FPS, 460 JPG. The R7 @15FPS, 224 JPG. I'd prefer the slower 15 FPS and longer time rather then higher FPS and shorter time. I couldn't find the buffer figures for C-RAW yet.
Upvote
0
I think I just started to understand Canon's plan - they were fed-up with all of the we-are-missing-APS-C-RF-mount-camera complainers (myself included), so rushed 2 new cameras to the market.
The plan was simple - let's release two disposable cameras, cause another 6DII like shitstorm, then dismiss the APS-C RF line altogether, mark it a dead-end with a bold - "we told you so" claim!
As usually happens with Canon - whatever sh*t they throw at the market, it will sell like a hot cakes and cause Canon marketing some headaches again. Now they've got another problem - many ppl realising, that the M line was not all that bad idea
The plan was simple - let's release two disposable cameras, cause another 6DII like shitstorm, then dismiss the APS-C RF line altogether, mark it a dead-end with a bold - "we told you so" claim!
As usually happens with Canon - whatever sh*t they throw at the market, it will sell like a hot cakes and cause Canon marketing some headaches again. Now they've got another problem - many ppl realising, that the M line was not all that bad idea
Upvote
0
Similar threads
