Upvote
0
The Canon EOS R7 Mark II is in the Wild
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
GMCPhotographics
Canon Rumors Premium
I agree. The question is....is it a cropped sensor R5ii or a cropped sensor R6iii? The R7 inherited a sensor from a DSLR cousin that never had any sensor read out speed issues because of the mechanincal shutter of those models. This is the first Canon dedicated Mirrorless cropped sensor with a consideration to readout speed. The big question is...is it based off the R6iii or the R5ii architecture: will it have a fast non stacked or a super fast stacked sensor?Thank you for the update. The main question for me is whether the rolling shutter of the R7 has been improved significantly enough. I hope the readout speed would be closer to the R5ii, but realistically, expect it to at best be around the r6iii's.
Only canon knows at this moment. However a sub 14m/s readout will be a massive improvement over the R7's readout speed. Hey...we would love a sub 5m/s readout though.....
A common user interface will be a big improvement for the R7 linage, dual cards (One CF express) is another boon....as will be the improved AF capability. Maybe a superior resolution EVF of the R6III will be cool too. I tend to find the sub 3 mill pixel EVF's to be grainy and jumpy. Over that res, I can't seem to see any difference between them other than contrast.
I'm really looking forwards to this camera, I think it needs to be a camera that's greater than the sum of it's parts / specification.
Upvote
0
Hi.
I used the 7D and 7D Mark II for 14 years. When I bought the R7, I thought it was rubbish. A week later, I had no problems at all. By the way, with some limitations, I think the R7 is a great camera for the price. A while ago, I tried using the 7D Mark II and found it very difficult. The R7 II will surely be better than the R7 in every way, and I'm not worried about the ergonomics because in a few days it will feel like an extension of my body. I'll definitely buy it.
I used the 7D and 7D Mark II for 14 years. When I bought the R7, I thought it was rubbish. A week later, I had no problems at all. By the way, with some limitations, I think the R7 is a great camera for the price. A while ago, I tried using the 7D Mark II and found it very difficult. The R7 II will surely be better than the R7 in every way, and I'm not worried about the ergonomics because in a few days it will feel like an extension of my body. I'll definitely buy it.
Upvote
0
They could make it cheaper and remove the screen all together.
Upvote
0
I don't think R100 buyers are agonizing over features and specs anyway.
And I don’t mean that in a critical way to the buyers. But from Canon's perspective, seems like it’d make sense to skip R&D expenditures and keep the price low, low, low.
***
The R10 though… well, I was recently a buyer in this price range, and I couldn’t understand the R10's positioning. Its missing features the cheaper R50/R50V have. It feels dated.
And it’s $1000! That’s a price range where most buyers, I think, look at specifications more closely. That body definitely needs an update.
And I don’t mean that in a critical way to the buyers. But from Canon's perspective, seems like it’d make sense to skip R&D expenditures and keep the price low, low, low.
***
The R10 though… well, I was recently a buyer in this price range, and I couldn’t understand the R10's positioning. Its missing features the cheaper R50/R50V have. It feels dated.
And it’s $1000! That’s a price range where most buyers, I think, look at specifications more closely. That body definitely needs an update.
Upvote
0
In some countries 50 $ more or less decided if a person can start with the hobby called photography. Also, revenue for photo services is much less and so cameras like the R100 and R50 are very, very important choices. I don´t think (although I don't prove) the R100 was mainly developed for USA, Japan and Europe, but more like for markets like southasia, Africa and south and middle America. Of course, it does sell in Europe, USA etc. as well because there is demand for it.
I keep in touch with my guide from a Safari in Kenya which I went to in 2022. He often posts Safari pics on his WhatsApp accounts and we sometimes chat about them. I often curiously ask about how took a photo, which camera gear etc... it is really surprising how many great pics are taken with entry level cameras, and yes, the R100 got a mention once.
In the end, I do not really comprehend (right word? "nachvollziehbar" in German) the hatred towards the R100. Imo, yes, a touchscreen should have been feasible or maybe even a floppy screen because R&D should been paid by all the cameras that have used and in order to get SP users to switch a touchscreen would've been more intriguing. Other than that, the cameras offers good value (sometimes great given the price point) for the money.
Upvote
0
Totally agree! I would even go out on a limb and say that several R100 customers don´t do any research concerning specs. They walk into Best Buy, look at the app. three options that fit their budget, take them for a spin within the shop and just buy one of them. Reading/ writing that, it becomes more evident that pricing is key here.
Agree again as mentioned above.
I was looking into the R10, but I didn't like the ergonomics. For me, the camera feels cramped maybe because it looks like a traditional camera design (concerning ergonomics) in a very small factor. I like what Canon did with the R50 V although with all the video features it is not for me.
Upvote
0
Canon - if they're listening - could add an option to change the shooting information display on the rear LCD to red (instead of white) to help preserve night vision.
We'd all have so much fun (and overly complicated cameras) if we could make there requests to Canon.
Upvote
0
Excellent idea: call it a vintage look or retro look and it will sell like hotcakes!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
That's because the R100 is incredible for safari stills!
If I only did stills, I wouldn't even look at R mirrorless cameras. Most advantages are for video shooting, or "ergonomic" features like more reliable autofocus, high ISO, IBIS, more resolution for cropping, HDR HEIFs and such.
But for SDR social media JPEGs? Old bodies are amazing at that.
These are uncropped frames I took in Tanzania in 2025. I picked a few "suboptimal" situations with weird lighting, moving animals, shooting from a moving vehicle and such. You know, things you'd presumably need a fancy camera to compensate for. And my technique was pretty awful:
Those were taken on a 2008 Rebel XS (1000D), and a 50-250mm IS II. That's like a thrift store camera these days!
Would I have made more good shots on an R1? Or my new R50V? ...Yeah.
But for web-bound safari jpegs, it really not that different from a 1000D. Avoiding some technical mistakes I made would have made a much bigger difference.
What's more, I can process all these raws to HDR JXL photos. From a 2008 camera! Ironically, the internet hasn't even caught up to such ancient hardware (as CanonRumors won't let me upload any HDR files).
***
Point I'm trying to make is, for stills, the volume of criticism for budget bodies like the R100 is definitely unwarranted.
Being a little cramped can be lived with on a budget. But on the other hand, the R10 does feel "neither here nor there." Not uber compact like the R50/R50V, yet not big enough to feel ergonomic like the R8/R7.
The R50V is a fantastic "carry around" stills camera, FYI. Even if I didn't shoot video, I wouldn't even think of trading it for an R50 or R10.
I would do unspeakable things for an R7V though. Shrink the R7, take away the EVF, keep the IBIS, and I'd be in heaven.
Upvote
0
I shoot only stills, and you don't mention the most important feature of the good mirrorless - superb tracking and rapid autofocus. If all you are doing is stills of nearly static large animals, then the old generation of Canon DSLRs were superb - I used a 5Div and 5DSR for a very satisfying safari in Tanzania. If you are doing birds in flight or getting good eye-AF on a far distant one, then an R5/R6 series blow them away as well as the R1/R3. And, despite negative comments from some, the R7 beats the 7Dii.That's because the R100 is incredible for safari stills!
If I only did stills, I wouldn't even look at R mirrorless cameras. Most advantages are for video shooting, or "ergonomic" features like more reliable autofocus, high ISO, IBIS, more resolution for cropping, HDR HEIFs and such.
But for SDR social media JPEGs? Old bodies are amazing at that.
These are uncropped frames I took in Tanzania in 2025. I picked a few "suboptimal" situations with weird lighting, moving animals, shooting from a moving vehicle and such. You know, things you'd presumably need a fancy camera to compensate for. And my technique was pretty awful:
Those were taken on a 2008 Rebel XS (1000D), and a 50-250mm IS II. That's like a thrift store camera these days!
Would I have made more good shots on an R1? Or my new R50V? ...Yeah.
But for web-bound safari jpegs, it really not that different from a 1000D. Avoiding some technical mistakes I made would have made a much bigger difference.
What's more, I can process all these raws to HDR JXL photos. From a 2008 camera! Ironically, the internet hasn't even caught up to such ancient hardware (as CanonRumors won't let me upload any HDR files).
***
Point I'm trying to make is, for stills, the volume of criticism for budget bodies like the R100 is definitely unwarranted.
Being a little cramped can be lived with on a budget. But on the other hand, the R10 does feel "neither here nor there." Not uber compact like the R50/R50V, yet not big enough to feel ergonomic like the R8/R7.
The R50V is a fantastic "carry around" stills camera, FYI. Even if I didn't shoot video, I wouldn't even think of trading it for an R50 or R10.
I would do unspeakable things for an R7V though. Shrink the R7, take away the EVF, keep the IBIS, and I'd be in heaven.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
