Canon EOS R7 Quick Review: Powering into the APS-C Space

[@ofautomotive]

Great review Dustin as usual ! Will you review the New Fujifilm X-H2(S) in a future ?

[@Romeo.Filmss]

I second this question

[@basilbcf]

Thanks for another great review, Dustin. I currently have a 5D Mark IV, and a 7D II which I recently sold. I had been thinking about getting either an R6 or an R5 and possibly selling the 5D Mark IV, however, I think now I am going to keep my excellent 5D IV to use for 90% of my shooting needs but get an R7 for those instances where I need high speed shooting and heavy cropping (e.g. Wildlife, Birds, Sports. I am planning to rent an R7 for about a week just to confirm in my own mind that it’s the right camera for my needs before I commit.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you can rent it is often a good idea to make sure that it works for you

[@robgerety]

Great review. Love those Golden Retrievers. I've been lucky to have 3 so far during my life. Contemplating whether to bring another into our home. They sure bring a lot of joy into your life. A lot of dog hair in the house too!

[@emix1010]

I’ll stick to my 90D, the R7 chokes on just about the same things it does, and I’m happy with its AF. Also, for one thing, it’s a DSLR, and it will keep shooting long after the mirrorless will have drained its battery; and it’s the EF mount. I like my R6 for a good part of what I do, but the 90D will stay for a while yet as my little telephoto crop monster.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you're happy with what you have, then that's really what matters.

[@harrison00xXx]

I personally found the R7s runtime AWESOME. But i am coming from a "cancerous" EOS RP, probably the WORST runtime, especially in video of all DSLMs ever. In photo and with energy saving/standby options used it also is enough for about a day photography, but dont look at video and its over without a spare battery or charging between usages on the go! Its still true, as i stil used DSLRs, i was impressed HOW LONG i could still use a fked up, 10 years old original canon battery in my 550D. Meanwhile the RPs tiny battery was so fast empty. But the R7 keeps up really good with the bigger NH battery, i can easily use it for 2 days without charging (mainly photo, rarely video because it also drains in 4k fine or 4k60)

[@mb-moose]

Excellent again boss. Full review will be a treat. Question... if you owned an rf100-500 lens (for wildlife) , which would give best image if you needed more reach..a cropped r5 or a r5 with 1.4xteleconvrt or an uncropped r7? I'm very disappointed canon aren't allowed third party lenses. For my retirement I was considering a r5 with two or three good lenses. Some of the rf lenses are just too expensive, and I was hoping for perhaps sigma art lenses. As you say, this lack of option might make me look to nikon or Sony.

[@markcasebeer8273]

Thanks for the review. Loved my 7d II. I switched to Fuji as Canon was so late coming to the party. I hope you will review the new Fuji H2s and H2. 😊

[@luism.2050]

Interesting 1st review. But without lenses it’s hard to think of the R10 and R7 as systems to get into yet. And with Canon track record with BOTH EF-S and EF-M, it’s pretty much impossible to trust them at their word that quality affordable lenses like the ones available with Sony or Fuji, will be available anytime soon.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid that its pretty accurate. The tracking record with EF-M, in particular, is not encouraging.

[@harrison00xXx]

Whatever happens, it can only get better. If canon make some usable RF-S glass or more affordable RF full frame... good. If they dont care and also dont allow any 3rd party Lens with autofocus... RF will die out faster than EF and you can get hands on affordable RF L glass. Or just ADAPT EF GLASS. EF 70-200 Mk2, 100-400 5,6L pull zoom, 17-40 F4 on super budget, 16-35 2.8 for the good wide angle, 24-105L,.... All these lenses are still performing awesome on full frame and for APS-C like 32MP R7 you better look how sharp they are before you buy. But they cost like 1/4 or less than the RF lenses. To make more usage of adapting lenses just get a damn Meike EF RF adapter (super affordable and useful!) with filters and ejoy a damn universal usable filter set for all of your EF lenses.

[@johnjuby6184]

I've had an R7 for awhile and sold a lot of old gear to MPB so I could acquire the real deal RF 100-500 and RF 70-200 F4 lenses. Yes, it's a lot of $ but it big time manifests your well attested fundamental capabilities of the R7. And you were only working with the kit lens that I also have. The expensive glass would blow you away and from experience I say do it. I gambled my 7D MII, EOS R, several EF lenses and what ever else I had on it and will never regret the plunge. The only complaint I have for R7 is the change in wheels. The old Canon layout was much easier to control; but, you get used to it.

[@yufengdong6153]

Excellent review! How good is the AF when adapted to EF lenses with superb AF ability such as EF 70-200/2.8? My plan is to use it for kids’ soccer, but cannot afford the RF70-200/2.8. How are the two compared when used with R7? Thank you!

[@yufengdong6153]

Currently I am using 7D2 paired with ef 70-200/2.8. AF is superb，but not the image quality at high ISO. video capability is far behind.

[@aspotterabroad4145]

I frequently use my R7 with an EF 70-200 f/2.8L II.......no issues with it shooting fast action.

[@cooloox]

@@yufengdong6153 Canon lists all lenses compatible with 30fps burst shooting. Both the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 and f/4 lenses from their version II or later were listed.

[@harrison00xXx]

yep, no problems with EF 70-200 2.8 Mk2, but i guess its not as fast as the RF. But also using just the RF 800 F11... how to explain... the RF 800 focus SITS INSTANT when its coming in focus, but it takes "a while" to get there, the EF 70-200 is super fast in focusing with the R7 but it sometimes hunt a bit before it settles at the right spot. It might just look like but well, at least it doesnt focus breathe in AF-C eye focus which was a concern until i tried it.

[@cooloox]

@@yufengdong6153 Have you ever tried mirrorless? I have a 7D Mk II with battery grip and it's a tank. Image quality is relatively poor, but AF is OK. I can honestly say the AF on my RP is vastly superior. I just bought an R7 and it's AF is vastly superior to the RP. Mirrorless AF is world's apart from the old DSLR cameras, unless you have a 1DX Mk III.

[@victorthenotsogreat1975]

I bought my R10, the adapter and Sigma 150 600 mm C, I notice is some situation the pictures are coming acceptable but in low light and high light is a complete disaster, I wonder if the R7 has much better dynamic range, I though picture taken in this video but I think they are not acceptable.

[@cooloox]

Hi Dustin, great review, as always. What's the story with this HEIF format? It is unbelievably clean at high ISOs, far cleaner than raw files. I shot my mannequin head in genuinely low light at ISO 10,000 and it has almost no visible noise. Is the camera taking multiple shots and combining them (like a smartphone does)? I don't understand why the images are so clean. The problem is that I can't work with them and have to convert them to another file format.

[@IntothewestOkotoks]

Great review as usual. I’ve been using my R7 for the last month, all with EF mount lenses (two Sigma APS-C lenses, two Tamron FF, and two Canon L lenses), and it’s all worked better than with my old DSLR. I agree with your ISO performance assessment as well, however I have noticed that DPP and DXO pure Raw 2 render raw files noticeably better than Lightroom above 3200. I’ve been impressed with 12800 (as long as you get the exposure right). My only complaint on the R7 is the EVF…just wish it was higher resolution, but definitely not a deal breaker.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Getting the exposure right at high ISO is pretty much a must.

[@1337Jogi]

@@DustinAbbottTWI This channel is my Go-To destination if I want to have a thorough and competent review. Even in such a short format everything important is touched. Thanks for that.

[@harrison00xXx]

at high iso the right exposure? At high ISO i overexpose as much as possible to decrease noise in post. In overall, i overexpose a lot in any situation just when its not possible due low light.

[@doghouseriley4732]

@@harrison00xXx Your only complaint? Your happy with the lack of decent weather sealing? The rolling shutter? And the fact that the mechanical shutter is not dampened so you get shutter quake from it? No to mention the buffer.......... Canon's next product will be a chocolate teapot

[@harrison00xXx]

@@doghouseriley4732 yeah i am happy with it And i guess you mean shutter shock?

[@doghouseriley4732]

I am glad to see that this was the quick review because it was starting to sound like an informercial for Canon. I look forward to your indepth dive. Firstly, I currently shoot with the 7D Mk2 and was waiting with baited breatheto see how Canon would replace my 8 year old wildlife camera. To say that I was utterly dismayed would be an understatement. I have only ever shot with Canon but unfortunately they are not listening to their customers are are taking me for granted - bad mistake. If The R7 was designed to replace the 7D Mk2 then it failed on almost all counts, but let's first start off with the positives. The R7 has great autofocus, accurate and quick, just what you need for sports and wildlife. That's it. Seriously. That is as good as it gets. Let's look at the failings: 1) Poor weather sealing. By Canon's own admission (rung out of them) that the weather sealing is not as good as the 8 year old 7D Mk2. If you are planning to shoot outside, check the weather, but you might still end up with dust inside your camera. 2) Buffer: This is the size of a pin head. 30 shots of RAW will fill your buffer and it will take 8 seconds to clear. That's worse than my 7D Mk2. Now you could shoot jpegs, heif, or CompressedRAW. Or you could reduce the fps. Obviously, you just spent £2,000 to compromise from day one, didn't you? 3) Rolling shutter: If you are panning, well forget it. The warping is truely amazing. If you remember the old Dr. Who intro, just like that. Now you could use the mechanical shutter. Well you could if it wasn't for the fact that it didn't suffer from shutter shoch like an earth quake, you'll have to use pretty fast shutter speeds. 4) Lens options: there are very few lens options on the RF mount. You could use your old EF glass, in fact, you'll probably have to, have you seen the price of the RF glass? And of course, Canon are threatening 3rd party companies if they offer RF mount lenses so Canon can continue fleecing their "loyal customers". 5) No CF card............................... beggars belief. So let's compare this to the X-H2S. This is a crop sensor camera from Fuji, with an X-trans stacked sensor. 1) Weather sealed, properly. 2) Buffer: Massive. If you hit it, your finger will have cramp from pressing the button. 3) Rolling shutter: Neglible if any, it's a stacked sensor so much quicker read out. 4) Extensive lens selection because Fuji specialise in crop sensor cameras. Incluiding a new 200-600 - see how cheap that is compared to Canon's new 100-500. 5) CF card and SD card slots. 6) Frames per second - faster than the R7 Yes the Fuji is £500 more but their "wildlife lens" 200-600 is £1000 cheaper than Canon's! Apart from that, the R7 is brilliant! Men and boys!

[@PaoloC.]

could I use my EF-S lenses with the adapter with success?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I definitely think you can.

[@albano.garcia]

Hi, great review. C-RAW isn't lossless.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

When it is the lossless option, it is.

[@albano.garcia]

@@DustinAbbottTWI from the R7 page on Canon site: "When quality is paramount, switch to RAW. The EOS R7 offers a number of options, including 14-bit CR3 RAW files, C-RAW files that take up less space with minimal quality loss, and RAW burst." I put the link on a previous answer but it got deleted or filtered.

[@robertm3951]

The Electronic Shutter can also be set to 15 FPS

[@zegzbrutal]

Will the jelly effect improve by slower FPS?

[@robertm3951]

@@zegzbrutal No, it will not. The speed of the rolling shutter stays the same.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's interesting. It would help with the buffer, but considering the accompanying liabilities with electronic shutter I'd probably just stick to mechanical shutter.

[@neatengineering]

Probably better value than a teleconverter, but the real issue is lenses. At a minimum they need something like a 100-400 f5.6 RF-S, plus a 17-55 (or longer) f2.8, and some f1.4 primes (all stabilised.) I want a light, compact camera to travel with and don't want to pay a fortune for extra travel insurance. I'm thinking of adapting a Tamron EF-S 18-400 for travel, but for serious birding people will want something better.

[@alanm.4298]

Personally I think Canon is making a mistake slamming the door on 3rd party RF mount lenses. This is particularly noticeable now that they have the two APS-C cameras in the system and some serious holes in their existing lens lineup for those cameras. For example, wouldn't it have been nice to have Viltrox' excellent 13mm f/1.4, 23mm f/1.4, 33mm f/1.4 and 56mm f/1.4 which Nikon, Fuji and Sony shooters have available for their APS-C cameras. The superb Sigma 16mm, 30mm and 56mm trio would be great too (not yet available for Nikon Z-mount, but avail. for Sony, Fuji and Canon EF-M). The only Canon RF-S lenses so far are two kit lenses: RF-S 18-45mm and a slight upgrade RF-S 18-135mm. At a minimum, Canon should be releasing an official lens road map to let us know what they have planned and approx. when we might see them. (Nikon has updated their lens roadmap.) Canon has some superb RF lenses... But they fall into two main types... Premium L series that are very expensive or more affordable, but somewhat compromised models that lack IS, use slower STM focus drive, aren't very bright and, in the case of zooms, have variable apertures. Yes, we can compensate by adapting EF and EF-S lenses, but that's not ideal either. Dustin, I agree with much of what you have said about the R7 and I think it's going to be a very successful camera... But I actually think it is more a successor to the 90D, than to the 7D Mark II. Yes, the R7 outperforms 7DII in several ways... But keep in mind that the 7DII is eight years old now and was quite advanced for its day. R7 doesn't have the same build quality or sealing for weather resistance, cannot accommodate a battery grip and is seriously short of buffer space. This is not to say the R7 is "bad". It's actually a very good camera with some really great features. But it is not a "pro oriented" APS-C, not a truly class leading, stand out model like the 7DII was in its heyday. In my opinion, only the Nikon D500 slightly surpassed the 7DII, among APS-C DSLRs. Those two... 7DII and D500... were undisputed class leaders. Still are, for that matter. (90D did not replace both 80D and 7DII, although Canon tried to sell is that idea.) The R7 is a very respectable and competitive camera in the APS-C mirrorless marketplace. But it will be eclipsed rather easily by the competition in the not too distant future, I predict. Canon could have, maybe should have, called it am R90 and set a higher bar for their R7. And they have a lens problem that could have been filled quickly by cooperating with 3rd party manufacturers.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Totally agree.

[@AlexLancashirePersonalView]

I like to use the M6 along with my R6. Thw M6 has 32 mp. and adapts to my EF lenses if I wish. The R6 with just 20mp is better for more serious work with the RF L lenses. The M6 does give better pics for enlarging or cropping, Dustin. (How is the squirrel by the way.) Shot on the R6 with the 70-200 RF L f/4 lens. kzbin.info/www/bejne/hZDIdpptlq-qlZo

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Having that additional resolution can definitely be useful.

[@perprzem]

Seems that it`s time to sell 80D and buy R7

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That will be a pretty huge upgrade.

[@GinoFoto]

An excellent camera, unfortunately nowadays just out of general public interest, imagine how impact camera like this would have had around 2010. We must to appreciate such advanced products and not take those for granted, who can, should buy and support the photography industry.

[@FordSierraIS]

what are you talking about? there wasnt any 4k tvs in 2010, and the cpus was way to slow to edit that bitrate. storage space would also be an issue back then with 40mb raw files.

[@GinoFoto]

@@FordSierraIS What i meant with term "camera like this"? So uncompromised machine that contain anything what they have to offer. Movement between generations was back then almost ridiculous, as specs differences was just in theoretical row most of the time.

[@FordSierraIS]

@@GinoFoto but the r7 doesnt have everything. its a crop sensor, it can only record compressed video, no clog2, 1080p120 is without audio and automatically slowed to 30p and there are no rf-s lenses except the kit ones.

[@FordSierraIS]

having said that its still a very impressive kit for the price and im enjoying mine. what do you mean its not of interest today? its sold out since release

[@cjm8160]

@@FordSierraIS my main concern with buying the R7 as a b cam is the limited lens selection. I could always use my RF lenses on the R7, but how well does the R7 perform with full frame lenses on it?

[@harrison00xXx]

All i can say to any RP owner... If you even upgrade to the R7 "only", let alone the R6: If you dont mind the extra weight/size.... you will HATE to hold the RP then! I also dont like the grip as much anymore on the RP, but i personally still love the smaller size and especially super lightweight/"compact camera" like EOS RP for many situations.