Everything We’ve Been Told About The Canon EOS R7 Mark II

[john1970]

Perfectly content with the R5 Mk2 and when I need to crop in to APS-C I can and still have enough pixels for a very clean 8x10 print. My first high-end camera body was a Nikon D4S with 16 MP full frame and readily made 16x20 prints without any issue.

 

[SvO2]

Perfectly content with the R5 Mk2 and when I need to crop in to APS-C I can and still have enough pixels for a very clean 8x10 print. My first high-end camera body was a Nikon D4S with 16 MP full frame and readily made 16x20 prints without any issue.

Still means you can crop ~1.4x on top of the r7’s 1.6 crop and maintain that resolution

 

[Ronomy]

That is not super niche, a common hobbyist activity.

I use my R7 for birding and wildlife...i live on a farm and see lots of wild animals sitting on my back yard deck everyday. I also use it to shoot our Labradoodles. We breed Australian Labradoodles. So i use it to shoot them playing ball fetch. Also puppy portraits for clients on a weekly basis as the puppies grow in the first 8 weeks With DXOs Ai noise reduction these days noise isn't an issue. And the R7 is way less noisy than my old 7D. I also have a 6D. I use that for night time sky shooting like Auroras. 6D is still a great camera just lacking the newer focusing in mirrorless cameras. I thought about upgrading it with the R6 but i think i rather use the R7. I have to crop a lot the puppy pictures. So the much higher pixel density is very useful. I would need to move up to the R5 for the puppy portrait crops to gain more pixels. And that's more than i wanted to spend. I paid under a grand for a canon refurb R7 last year. Best bang for the buck...and i already had good glass. Sigma 18-35 art is fantastic for the puppy portraits... I have canon glass too L and non-L.

I also shoot 10 bit HDR video with the R7. I have plenty of glass. Very wide to long telephoto lenses.

So for me... I use the R7 for just about everything!

 

[johnchio]

Who's the audience for the R7 ?
Birders ?
Anyone else ?

I also use it sometimes for outdoor sports, but that is because this is my best camera. The reach is great but rolling shutter is quite an issue sometimes

 

[AlanF]

I love where the joystick and wheel is on the R7. I rarely used where it was on older cameras. Where it is on the R7 is exactly where my thumb sits so perfect location! I don't understand why so many didn't learn by using it to see its in the perfect spot.

When you pair it with the R5/ii or others, you have two different sets of rear controls that confuse muscle memory.

 

[Ronomy]

I also use it sometimes for outdoor sports, but that is because this is my best camera. The reach is great but rolling shutter is quite an issue sometimes

Interesting...i was shooting a flying helicopter last week and used electronic first curtain and the blades were perfectly straight. I do see rolling shutter with video especially when shooting low frame rates. Fine video mode it shows up a lot. I shoot in video crop mode most of the time now to reduce it and 60fps and higher shutter speeds helps too.

Thing is...look at the readout speeds of all the cheaper Canon models...they are all way slower than the R7. But rolling shutter is still my only gripe with this camera.

 

[johnchio]

Interesting...i was shooting a flying helicopter last week and used electronic first curtain and the blades were perfectly straight. I do see rolling shutter with video especially when shooting low frame rates. Fine video mode it shows up a lot. I shoot in video crop mode most of the time now to reduce it and 60fps and higher shutter speeds helps too.

Thing is...look at the readout speeds of all the cheaper Canon models...they are all way slower than the R7. But rolling shutter is still my only gripe with this camera.

yes. also when following a fast moving subject and shooting 15/30 fps, there is VERY noticeable distortion/rolling shutter

 

[Tom R5R7]

When you pair it with the R5/ii or others, you have two different sets of rear controls that confuse muscle memory.

I agree - would have liked the R7 to have been basically the same layout and size as the R5/R6, size and weight the same, and the control layout the same. It's almost like the marketers at Canon were more concerned with appeasing V-loggers than photographers with the camera. We'll see what the Mk II brings.

As I mentioned above, despite its hiccups, I love my R7 and use it more often than the R5.

 

[AlanF]

Interesting...i was shooting a flying helicopter last week and used electronic first curtain and the blades were perfectly straight. I do see rolling shutter with video especially when shooting low frame rates. Fine video mode it shows up a lot. I shoot in video crop mode most of the time now to reduce it and 60fps and higher shutter speeds helps too.

Thing is...look at the readout speeds of all the cheaper Canon models...they are all way slower than the R7. But rolling shutter is still my only gripe with this camera.

The problems with rolling shutter are when the camera is used in ES mode, not EFCS or MS, and this is a more general problem with most cameras. I use mainly ES with the R7 as it removes all shutter shock but switch over to EFCS or manual when rolling shutter would be problem. My R5ii is permanently in ES mode.

 

[SteB1]

It doesn't make much sense why they'd eliminate the shutter without a stacked sensor, as it would mean a very low flash synch speed, and no means of eliminating rolling shutter effects, if it was a problem. I mainly use electronic shutter on both my R7 and R6 mkII, but there are situations when the electronic shutter is no use.

 

[Ronomy]

The problems with rolling shutter are when the camera is used in ES mode, not EFCS or MS, and this is a more general problem with most cameras. I use mainly ES with the R7 as it removes all shutter shock but switch over to EFCS or manual when rolling shutter would be problem. My R5ii is permanently in ES mode.

I have a button assigned on my R7 so that i can quickly turn on silent shutter. Which changes the R7 to electronic shutter from its pervious shutter setting. I am always set to EFCS. Quick tap of a button and i am in ES. Then can quickly change back to EFCS with tap of the button.

 

[ffleft]

I feel like this thread is sleeping on the EVF improvement rumor when so many were critical of Canon after the previous rumor that reported that the EVF would be similar/the same.

.9x FF equivalent (1.44x actual magnification, if I understand correctly) along with the presumable resolution improvements would be fantastic on an APS-C body! The R7 was already a noticeable improvement over the 7DII from 0.62x to 0.72x. Perhaps others disagree, but I find that having objects bigger in the viewfinder allows a substantial improvement in subject tracking and focus checking, not to mention a far more engaging experience while shooting. I sometimes use the virtual magnification on the R7 for distant, stationary subjects, but this is pointless and headache-inducing on BiF or other quick moving subjects. I did not know what I was missing until I had a few moments to try another photographer's A7RV (FF 0.9x) in the field, and then I wondered what was stopping Canon from putting an EVF like that on a small sensor camera and blowing away the competition.

This (and perhaps the readout speed improvements others mention) would make an R7II a no-brainer instant purchase.

 

[Philnick]

Please, full-frame users, let us R7 users keep the ergonomics we're used to! The thumbwheel by the viewfinder is perfect placement. I use it to set f/stop, and the main dial on the top for shutter speed. I use the ISO button to set that.

If you prefer the ergonomics of your full-frame model, then use yours in crop mode.

If they want to add another dial down where you guys are used to, fine - just don't take away what we're used to - and then you'd have the full three dials everyone complained was missing from the original R7.

All I want by way of an improvement is a back-side-illuminated sensor to improve low-light sensitivity.

And if they take out the mechanical shutter, they'd better let us still have full dynamic range and something to automatically cover the sensor when the camera is turned off so we can change lenses safely.

And don't make the body bigger and heavier to feel more like a full-frame. (See above.) APS-C is a bigger market than full-frame for a reason - and lighter weight and smaller size is a major part of it. I suspect that they're taking so long to release the R7 II because of a tug-of-war between those in the company who appreciate APS-C and those who see it as just a teleconverter for lenses that don't take one.

I come from forty years in the 35mm SLR world - my Canon FT-QL was similar in size to the R7. No one complained it was "too small" back then. Don't complain now.

 

[Philnick]

When you pair it with the R5/ii or others, you have two different sets of rear controls that confuse muscle memory.

So use your R5/II in crop mode and leave our camera alone! I wouldn't mind if they added a dial where you want one, but don't take away the one R7 owners are used to.

 

[Ronomy]

So use your R5/II in crop mode and leave our camera alone! I wouldn't mind if they added a dial where you want one, but don't take away the one R7 owners are used to.

They probably changed the location of the wheel and joystick already...I use the wheel and joystick with FV mode and can change F stop, shutter, exposure and ISO on the fly. Once you start using FV its awesome. And you can still set aperture and shutter priority to common setting that you can jump to if needed...but i find since I started using FV I haven't used the other priorities in a long time. So easy to change on the fly in the viewfinder or even on the rear screen. They move that wheel on the R7ii and FV mode will be way more difficult to use.

 

[padam]

I feel like this thread is sleeping on the EVF improvement rumor when so many were critical of Canon after the previous rumor that reported that the EVF would be similar/the same.

Looks like a random wishlist rather than careful collection of rumoured specs. This is supposed to be the latest update, yet it makes the least sense... Why would a 7-series Canon get a better EVF than an R5 or R3? Makes no sense, especially for 2000$. (Sony won't put such EVF in lesser cameras either) And anyway, they don't know the release date either, solid rumors start emerging once that is set.

The R6 III is supposed to be coming soon, yet there is still no solid info about final specs other than looking like an R6 II with a C50 sensor.

 

[AlanF]

So use your R5/II in crop mode and leave our camera alone! I wouldn't mind if they added a dial where you want one, but don't take away the one R7 owners are used to.

I just wrote that is was a problem for muscle memory having different ergonomics and nothing about which one I preferred. We are all creatures of habit and don't like change.

 

[Tom R5R7]

So use your R5/II in crop mode and leave our camera alone! I wouldn't mind if they added a dial where you want one, but don't take away the one R7 owners are used to.

If the R5 offered 32.5 mpx in APS-C "crop" mode, there would be no need for me to have an R7. At least not for me. But it does not because that would require that the R5 have about 83 megapixels. (1.6^2 * 32.5).

Also, as the flagship APS-C body, it ought to share its design and ruggedness with mid/high end bodies like the R5 series.

 

[Planterz]

Who's the audience for the R7 ?
Birders ?
Anyone else ?

For me it'd be for aircraft. Airshows and planespotting. Wildlife would be a secondary use - I haven't done very much yet (just urban wildlife here in the desert), but I'd like to do more.

I'm very interested in the R7 II, but I hate that Canon has a huge gap between the RF 100-400mm f5.6-8 and the 100-500mm f4.5-7.1. The perfect lens for me would be the Tamron 50-400mm - good compromise between size/weight and reach, 1:2 half macro, weather sealed, function button can be set as focus limiter, etc. The wider wide end is also great for when planes fly in formation. Living in the desert, I don't like that the RF 100-400mm isn't weather/dust sealed. It's also a bit slow - very slow compared to the Sony 100-400mm GM (but of course it's way cheaper). The 100-500mm would be ideal of course, but there's the issue of price. I'm not adverse to paying for the better lens, but if the Tamron 50-400mm was available, it'd be perfect for me. I'd even pay a premium over the Sony/Nikon price if Canon wants their "taste". But alas...

I'm currently a Sony user, with an a6700 and the 70-350mm G lens. Great combo, love the low weight and size, but I think the side mounted viewfinder is making it harder for me to initially aim and track. Plus I wouldn't mind more FPS. I'd kinda prefer to stick to Sony (don't lynch me!), but Sony doesn't make a camera comparable to the R7 or R7 II (not yet, anyway). The ideal Sony combo would be the A1 II and the 100-400mm GM (and maybe the 1.4x TC), but the price of that combo makes any Canon camera plus the 100-500mm look dirt cheap despite the price of the lens. Yeah, there's the older A1, or the A9 II, but I feel like if I'm going that far, I might as well go all in. However, I'm not "locked in" to Sony - currently I only have the 70-350mm and the Sigma 10-18mm, and I can get that Sigma for the R7 if I feel like selling my Sony gear (although honestly I'd probably just keep it).

Still, I kinda like the idea of "growing" into the Canon ecosystem. With the 100-500mm lens I could eventually also get a full frame body like the R5 II, which is significantly cheaper than the A1 II (I think the R5 II is a lesser camera, but still extremely good and more than "sufficient").

Obviously I'll have to wait for the R7 II to be released and for the dozens of reviews to be posted before I make any decision. Plus I'm still far away from affording anything - I've got a sizeable chunk saved already, but I'll still need a sizable chunk more.

Anyway, thanks if you've actually read through all my musing and ramblings. I'd be grateful to anyone of they have any thoughts to offer.

 

[AlanF]

If the R5 offered 32.5 mpx in APS-C "crop" mode, there would be no need for me to have an R7. At least not for me. But it does not because that would require that the R5 have about 83 megapixels. (1.6^2 * 32.5).

Also, as the flagship APS-C body, it ought to share its design and ruggedness with mid/high end bodies like the R5 series.

TBH, once you start going up in iso or narrower in aperture, the 17mpx of the R5/RFii resolves detail as well as the 32Mpx of the R7 because of noise and diffraction, although the R7 does put more pixels on the target. To get the best out of the R7, you need an f/4 lens or wider. Having said that, I have got good images from the R7 with the RF 800/11 in decent light.