Has Canon axed their Canon EOS R7 C plans? [CR2]

On the other hand, one of the people I met on a recent safari bought one and quickly sold it, considering it to be too small and the controls too cramped.

I considered getting an R7 as a backup to my R5, but have decided to wait until the R5 price drops further, and will then get a second R5 body.
I rented the R7 to see whether I'd like to keep it as a second camera to my R. It is a very capable camera for the money, but I didn't like the controls that much. Furthermore, I decided to keep my R till it breaks as a back-up/ second camera body. Therefore R7 is not an option for me because its controls are just too different. I'd like to have cameras with similar controls. I do know, they're not exactly the same.

In the end, at one point I'll get a R5 (probably mk 1) when the price drops further. R5mkii would only be an option if the starting doesn't t exceed the R5´s in 2020 (it will) and the controls stay the same as with the mk I. Imho, they are pretty similar to the R (except that Touch Bar which was replaced by the joystick)
 
Upvote 0

AlanF

Desperately seeking birds
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
12,430
22,838
It's one of those slightly quirky cameras that polarizes opinions.

I know that @AlanF uses one for BIF and seems to regard it highly. One of my butterfly photography pals also has one and also rates it very highly. On the other hand, one of the people I met on a recent safari bought one and quickly sold it, considering it to be too small and the controls too cramped.

I considered getting an R7 as a backup to my R5, but have decided to wait until the R5 price drops further, and will then get a second R5 body.
It's an excellent camera. It isn't as good as my R5 for BIF - very few can compete with the R5 - but in reasonable light it outresolves it with the same lens. That reminds me, I was going to post you about your need for a single lens to cope with both birds and large animals on safari without changing a TC. You might want to consider the R7 for safari with the RF 100-500mm. In practice, the bare lens on the R7 has nearly the reach of the lens + 2xTC at 1000mm on the R5, and zoomed out has the fov of a 160mm on FF. It may just complement your R5 better than a 2nd R5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Sep 20, 2020
3,133
2,438
“APS-C cinema camera = new direction for Canon”? What am I missing? C70, C300iii, C200 are all Super 35 sensors . . . Doesn’t S35 almost match APS-C sensor size? I’m not getting that point. I have never owned a full-frame cinema camera. All S35.
No, Canon has a larger than normal super 35 and a smaller than normal APS-C.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
I rented the R7 to see whether I'd like to keep it as a second camera to my R. It is a very capable camera for the money, but I didn't like the controls that much. Furthermore, I decided to keep my R till it breaks as a back-up/ second camera body. Therefore R7 is not an option for me because its controls are just too different. I'd like to have cameras with similar controls. I do know, they're not exactly the same.
I'm the same - I much prefer to have 2 bodies with identical controls, to save me fumbling and missing shots. It was easy with DSLRs - I had a 5DSR and a 5DMkiv so it was really easy to switch back and forth between them. I thought about getting a R6 as backup to my R5, which would work well, but I wanted more "pixels per duck".

I haven't even held an R7, but I'm 90% certain it wouldn't suit me, as I don't generally like small cameras (I found my friend's RP to be much too small and fiddly), and I'm a left-eye user, so would be constantly poking myself in the eye with my right thumb when using the rear thumbwheel.

Canon have come up with some innovative controls (e.g. swipe bar on the R, thumbwheel on the R7, smart controller on the R3), but having so many ergonomic variations causes "muscle-memory" problems for me when using a high end model as my primary camera, and a lower model as backup.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
It's an excellent camera. It isn't as good as my R5 for BIF - very few can compete with the R5 - but in reasonable light it outresolves it with the same lens. That reminds me, I was going to post you about your need for a single lens to cope with both birds and large animals on safari without changing a TC. You might want to consider the R7 for safari with the RF 100-500mm. In practice, the bare lens on the R7 has nearly the reach of the lens + 2xTC at 1000mm on the R5, and zoomed out has the fov of a 160mm on FF. It may just complement your R5 better than a 2nd R5.
Nice suggestion Alan, but the problem for me (apart from the expense, and fumbling with 2 different control layouts) is that I'd be extremely reluctant to switch lenses between bodies on safari, due to the very dusty conditions, and the likelihood that I'd need to switch while the vehicle was bumping around on rough tracks (I can't afford exclusive use of a safari vehicle, and can't expect others in the group to stop and wait every time I want to swap lenses).

On safaris, I shoot animals and birds roughly 50/50, so the only real answer (as you suggested previously) is to have 2 bodies and 2 lenses, which would avoid any lens-swapping in the field. As indicated in my reply to @Exploreshootshare, I really need 2 bodies with identical controls, so I'll almost certainly wait until the R5 price drops further, and get another one - RF100-500mm on one, RF100-400mm on the other.

For most of the summer I'll be in Europe, concentrating on insects, flowers and landscapes - my next safari (Kruger) is in October, so there's plenty of time for the R5 price to drop before I go. Meanwhile, I'm holding on to my 5DMkiv (with EF100mm macro and T/S-E 24mm) as emergency backups in the unlikely event that my R5 breaks.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 21, 2010
31,186
13,048
Canon have come up with some innovative controls (e.g. swipe bar on the R, thumbwheel on the R7, smart controller on the R3), but having so many ergonomic variations causes "muscle-memory" problems for me when using a high end model as my primary camera, and a lower model as backup.
If I were going to use two bodies interchangeably on a trip or shooting an event, e.g. with different focal lengths to allow the fastest possible switching, I'd definitely want the controls to be identical or at least very similar. But for a 'backup' camera it matters much less, to me. On a trip last summer, I carried and used both the R3 and an M6II, and switching back and forth was not a problem (but that sort of thing doesn't require fast-paced shooting). On a trip this summer, I may take just the R8 (but probably one of my kids will use the M6II).

I think the worst case scenario would be using two cameras similar in size and heft but with different control layouts. With the R3 and M6II, muscle memory was helped by the size difference. This summer's trip will also test a different form of muscle memory – my first time driving with a manual transmission in several decades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
In the end, at one point I'll get a R5 (probably mk 1) when the price drops further. R5mkii would only be an option if the starting doesn't t exceed the R5´s in 2020 (it will) and the controls stay the same as with the mk I.
I'm extremely unlikely to get the R5 Mkii, as the R5 does just about all I need it to do, and will be half the price of the R5 Mkii by the time the latter is launched. Upgrades to AF, fps etc would be nice, but I don't think I'd be tempted until Canon bang out a version with a 90MP (ish) sensor that has DR and noise characteristics as good or better than the R5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

entoman

wildlife photography
May 8, 2015
1,998
2,438
UK
If I were going to use two bodies interchangeably on a trip or shooting an event, e.g. with different focal lengths to allow the fastest possible switching, I'd definitely want the controls to be identical or at least very similar. But for a 'backup' camera it matters much less, to me.
Yes that's how I feel.

On safaris I really need 2 identical bodies with different lenses, rather than an emergency backup, as I trust my R5 not to break (although there's always the feel good factor of having an extra body, just in case).

On other nature trips, where I'm usually walking for several hours a day, I rarely carry any extra lenses. I quite enjoy the discipline of restricting myself to just one. I tend to know in advance what type of subject I'll be photographing, and choose a lens accordingly. If I have a spare body for backup, I leave it at the hotel/lodge.

Manual transmission is fun! :D
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AlanF

Desperately seeking birds
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
12,430
22,838
If I were going to use two bodies interchangeably on a trip or shooting an event, e.g. with different focal lengths to allow the fastest possible switching, I'd definitely want the controls to be identical or at least very similar. But for a 'backup' camera it matters much less, to me. On a trip last summer, I carried and used both the R3 and an M6II, and switching back and forth was not a problem (but that sort of thing doesn't require fast-paced shooting). On a trip this summer, I may take just the R8 (but probably one of my kids will use the M6II).

I think the worst case scenario would be using two cameras similar in size and heft but with different control layouts. With the R3 and M6II, muscle memory was helped by the size difference. This summer's trip will also test a different form of muscle memory – my first time driving with a manual transmission in several decades.
I was getting worried that the younger generation are too set in their ways and lack the mental flexibility of us oldies so it's encouraging to see that a youngster like you can cope with change.;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Jan 27, 2020
826
1,796
So let's see we heard constant complaining about the lack of an R7, to the point where some people were hating on the M series because they perceived it as a threat to their chances of seeing an R7.

So now that we have it, I'm seeing little here but complaints about it.
That's what CR is for. I am sure you have noticed! It's Canon whiners and complainers 24/7. Go to the various R7 facebook groups and you'll see a few complainers, a few who sold theirs, but by far most users really love it. And consider me one of those who consider it a fantastic camera- especially for the price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Upvote 0
Jan 27, 2020
826
1,796
R7 is lazy low effort money grab from Canon and compared to Fuji XH2 yeah expecting a BSI sensor at the very least for the asking price was bare minimum. Also APS-C sensor should have better read out speed than FF cameras unlike R7 which is one of the slowest readout speeds.
Funny how something can be explained over and over again, but if a person has an agenda, they don't care about the facts. Absolutely no evidence that a BSI sensor gives better performance than a FSI sensor for sensors of this size. The advantage is in small, cell phone sized sensors. Feel free to continue to ignore this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Jan 27, 2020
826
1,796
It's an excellent camera. It isn't as good as my R5 for BIF - very few can compete with the R5 - but in reasonable light it outresolves it with the same lens. That reminds me, I was going to post you about your need for a single lens to cope with both birds and large animals on safari without changing a TC. You might want to consider the R7 for safari with the RF 100-500mm. In practice, the bare lens on the R7 has nearly the reach of the lens + 2xTC at 1000mm on the R5, and zoomed out has the fov of a 160mm on FF. It may just complement your R5 better than a 2nd R5.
I suppose it depends on experience and user technique. I had a chance to use an R5 for almost a month and while it did a fine job, my R7 does a better job for BIF. And in my actual hand-held use, outresolved the R5 is every circumstance with my 100-500 lens, but it was pretty close. When I got the R5, I thought I would sell the R7, but returned the R5 instead. The R7 just worked better for me for BIF, my main use for the camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
In 2023, Canon is in a position of not needing to let people know what's coming because there are plenty of options already. Just look the UWA options... 16mm, 14-35mm, 15-30mm, 15.35mm, 24mm, 35mm and not mentioning all the great EF glass.
UWA is available for full frame but not for RF-S/APS-C sensors unless you adapt EF-S UWA lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Aug 21, 2019
108
113
I don't think it is CR guy who is "swinging and missing" lately. I believe Canon is doing a really good job of keeping everybody to shut up. In addition, I believe in 2019/ 2020 let the "road map" slip on purpose to CR and other forums. That way, people "kind of knew" what to expect without being able to hold Canon accountable. By not publishing an official road map, they were/ are able to decide up to the start of production which way they'd like to go with a lens. For example: The rumor mill suggested the RF version and follow-up of the EF 100-400mm L "will have a greater range." Suddenly, patents of a 70-400mm surfaced but Canon managed to surprise us with the magnificent RF 100-500mm. Also, they had more surprises up their sleeves such as the dual-fisheye RF5.2mm

In 2023, Canon is in a position of not needing to let people know what's coming because there are plenty of options already. Just look the UWA options... 16mm, 14-35mm, 15-30mm, 15.35mm, 24mm, 35mm and not mentioning all the great EF glass. I'm pretty sure Canon has raised the fines for breaking the confidentiality clause for those photographers/ YouTubers who get sneak peaks of new gear.

The result being: none of the rumor sites has a trustworthy info ahead of time now.
From whiffs ranging from firmware to hardware, it's been embarrassing.
 
Upvote 0
Aug 21, 2019
108
113
I suppose it depends on experience and user technique. I had a chance to use an R5 for almost a month and while it did a fine job, my R7 does a better job for BIF. And in my actual hand-held use, outresolved the R5 is every circumstance with my 100-500 lens, but it was pretty close. When I got the R5, I thought I would sell the R7, but returned the R5 instead. The R7 just worked better for me for BIF, my main use for the camera.
Interesting, my experience has been quite the opposite. In spite of the limitations (buffer, slower scan rate, controls, etc.) I really appreciated the R7 for its compact size, light weight, and battery life. Attached to the 100-500 it was the killer, compact combination for hiking or portability. Unfortunately, compared to my R5, the AF is not as consistently accurate and IQ is not as good (in spite of the higher pixel density) due to pixel noise and loss of a stop of DR. I still prefer my R5 which is usually wedded to a long prime with the R7 on my shoulder with the 100-500 for spontaneous/closer action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0