I’m thinking about finally upgrading my 60D to an R7. Yes I know that it’s still a crop sensor, but it’s where my budget lies.
I notice that one can also buy a EF to M adaptor so at least at the outset there is no need to replace lenses.
The questions I have are:
Does anyone here own a R7, and if so what are your thoughts about features and pic quality? If you had to buy a camera now, knowing what you know about your R7, would you buy an R7 or something else?
By using a lens adaptor, do you notice any distinguising difference in pic quality?
There’s a local dealer here that has a special on till the end of the month, so any help to make up my mind would be invaluable.
if you use a EF to R adapter instead your existing lenses will behave as before - the adapter just adds the missing space between sensor and lens mount …
I seriously considered the R7 when I decided to move to mirrorless from a Canon DSLR, but I decided to change to FujiFilm because Canon didn’t appear to be serious about supporting APS-C as anything other than a stepping-stone to FF. If you look at the lens range, they’re mostly plastic “kit” type lenses and you’ll need to move to FF lenses to get anything decent, at which point a lot of the advantages of mirrorless APS-C (lighter kit) kinda disappear.
Since I was going to (eventually) end up upgrading my lenses anyway I figured I might as well do it all at once, and I couldn’t be happier with the result. Mostly my Canon lenses were traded in for credit against used Fuji ones.
I upgraded to the R7 from my 7D2 and am happy with it. I mostly shoot wildlife and macro and the camera can handle most of what I ask of it. Low light performance is pretty good for a crop sensor, and the high pixel count lets me crop in closer than I normally would. Plus, the R7 is lightweight and compact, which makes it great for macro.
The RF adapter works seamlessly with my EF lenses. I found the extra $100 USD for the model with the control ring was well worth it. I did find the R7 has focus pulsing issues with my Sigma 150-600C, which forced me to move to the RF 100-500L… and expensive upgrade but well worth it.
My only real complaint is that the autofocus is not very effective with birds in flight. It tends to lose track and go completely to the far field of focus and then I have to focus to something extremely close and re-acquire and by that point the moment is gone.
If I was going to start fresh again I would go with Sony, probably with the A9 and the FE 200-600, but the price point would force me to go used. Having said that I really have no regrets with the R7 at all. It’s been a solid work horse and I enjoy using it.
I have an R7 and can recommend it without hesitation. I bought a third party Ef to Rf adaptor and my Canon lenses adapted with no problems. The more expensive Canon adapter with the control ring can be handy as it could be programed to adjust ISO in manual mode or for another function. The EF to M adaptor is for the Canon M series cameras and not the R7.
I chose the crop sensor instead of going fullframe to maximise my telephoto lenses for wildlife photography. That is the big advantage of a crop sensor and the R7 has high pixel density allowing a lot of post shoot cropping. Because you have Canon lenses already it would make financial sense to stick with another Canon body and the R7 is great for both still and videos with in built body stabilisation adding to the lenses stabilisation.
I have that one but have to admit I never use that function… In my opinion, the position of the ring is awkward - especially with longer lenses. I rather use the ISO setting using the M-Fn menu, for example. Personally, I never found a good use for the control ring and could have saved 100€ by buying the cheaper adapter but ymmv…
Updated from a 70D to a R7. No regrets. The 18-150mm you find in kits is quite good.
The R7 works well with most of my existing EF/EF-S lenses (Canon 100mm macro USM, Canon 35mm macro, Canon 50mm f/1.8, Sigma 17-7° Contemporary), and adequately with my Sigma 120-400mm. In practice my main lens is the RF 18-150mm that came with it. Now of course I will eventually replace my existing lenses but I can do it leisurely.
I’m reviewing the pictures I took last week in Scotland and there aren’t that many to cull due to focus problems or motion blur. The IBIS will also do auto-levelling so the pictures are straight up out of camera.
Among other functionalities: built-in focus stacking and panorama
I have one too and I’m happy with it (pixel density, weight, raw burst mode). The ergonomics and the autofocus require a bit of learning. It has noise but this is generally well treatable. The rolling shutter may be a problem with moving subjects (wings of birds).
There are rumors that a R7Mii will come out later this year but no specs are out yet.
I use it as part of a custom dial setting, where I have the main dial controlling shutter and the back dial controlling exposure compensation in auto ISO, with the adapter ring mapped to aperture. This provides immediate access to the “exposure triangle” without having to push extra buttons.
The location is awkward as you said, but I normally have aperture wide open, but I can change that in the times when I need to stop down.
That depends on the kind of photography you do (street? Landscape? Portraits? Wildlife? Sports? Etc) and what kind of lenses you need.
Personally, when I tried out the R7 I was very impressed with the ergonomics and the AF. It is such a comfortable camera that I found it hard to put it down.
The reason I did not buy it was the paltry selection of native lenses. It puzzles me why Canon made such a great crop sensor line but did not furnish it with more lenses. And even those lenses are pretty pricey.
Personally, I would consider Fujifilm, Sony, and micro 4/3, unless you are really a fan of Canon’s exact menu system and controls. And buy used. But, as always I would determine the lenses first and then look at bodies.
There are several RF-S lenses from Sigma and Tamron. In fact the R7 is the Canon mirrorless camera that is best suited to take third-party lenses, since these are all for RF-S and without an optical IS.
I can see the advantages of it, but also on my 25-105 L lens, I never use it Perhaps, I’m already so used to the button workflow that my fingers just never reach there…
I would agree with that, especially in my case when I am jumping between various makes and models of cameras because of my teaching commitments. But the camera can be customised to suit your needs very well. I often shoot at 32000 ISO and find the noise acceptable but under exposing the image will increase noise more than turning the ISO up, so for this camera I recommend ETTR. I do auto bracketing of 1.67 EV and edit the brightest picture without clipping to get the least noise.
I personally would not worry about this at all unless you think the small advantage in low light is really important to you. Modern camera sensors handle higher ISOs much better than they used to, and there are advantages to staying with APS-C. It’s what you’re used to, you get more reach, and you can have a smaller/cheaper kit.
The main problem with Canon APS-C is that they really don’t seem to want to support their APS-C line much, so you might want to consider another brand? There are tons of APS-C lens options for E-Mount and X-Mount for example.
When I was upgrading from my Canon 600D, I was seriously considering full-frame and staying with Canon, but I impulsively moved to Fujifilm after reading about their X-Mount lens line-up. There was some adjustment, but it wasn’t hard, and I really love the ecosystem now.
But every brand has great cameras at the moment. I think its hard to go wrong in this day and age. Try a few options and see what you like best.
B&Hphoto lists 17 AF lenses, 7 of which are Canon, 7 from Sigma, 2 from Tamron, one from Rokinon and Samyang. This includes the upcoming Tamron 18–300mm which is said to be very good.
Conspiciously missing are primes for various common focal lengths, constant aperture zooms, etc. The message from Canon is very clear: if you need these, get a lens with full frame coverage, and eventually a full frame body.
Compare this with the 100+ lenses for X-mount [to be fair, about 20 of these are color variations], or the almost 79 lenses for E-mount (with APS-C coverage). Fujifilm is clearly taking APS-C the most seriously, which of course makes sense since they don’t do full frame, but Sony is not bad either. These days, even Nikon is doing better than Canon when it comes to APS-C lenses.
It all depends on the needs of @Baldrick. If he has a lot of lenses he likes for EF and is OK with an adapter then I think it could be a good choice, many pro photographers actually kept their EF glass since the adapters are very good and provide efficient AF. Then the R7 is a great choice. Otherwise, I would look at other options.
Your filters are flawed. The listing for Sony includes FF coverage lenses while the Canon one doesn’t. Sony doesn’t do a lot of APS-C only glass and treat it the same way, or even worse since it’s older, than Canon.
Thanks, I pasted the wrong one, hope it is correct now; the filter definitely includes APS-C, but lenses with incorrect data can still slip through.
Nevertheless, E-mount still has few constant aperture zooms for APS-C, and a full range of primes. (But you don’t need to convince me, I would pick Fujifilm if I wanted to go APS-C I can’t wait for their new announcement in a few days)
Perhaps, I’m already so used to the button workflow that my fingers just never reach there…