Do any of you that just got the R7 have a 90D also ?
I'm on the fence between buying one or the other and curious how much if any better the R7 would be.
I know most cameras perform better with a 10k lens mounted to them.
Curious does anyone that currently have the R& having issues with RF lens control Ring I have programmed it for Exposure compensation but it will not work on any RF lens I have tried including the Kit 18-150 lens not sure what is going on
Bill Gass wrote:
Do any of you that just got the R7 have a 90D also ?
I'm on the fence between buying one or the other and curious how much if any better the R7 would be.
I know most cameras perform better with a 10k lens mounted to them.
Don't have the 90D, but was previously looking at 5DIV vs R6. The major advantage of mirrorless is autofocus. Both accuracy and speed will blow away the 90D, as good as the 90D is. And then add in the eye tracking on top of that. And this is with all lenses, not jus the 10k ones. The AF system itself is more accurate because its testing focus at the image plane. 90D has the first gen of some of this tech in live view mode only, but the newest generation is a step change better. The only real drawback is battery life is shorter. If you're just taking snapshots of static subjects, and don't need the speed (FPS) or eye-tracking AF then it may not be worth it to you to go mirrorless. But...you wouldn't be saving a lot of money and buying something close to the end of its product cycle (90D).
I went R6. The speed was amazing and the AF astounding. For the same price as a camera that is in production but at the end of its life cycle (same as with the 90D). The only thing you need is an adapter.
Ray Still wrote:
Curious does anyone that currently have the R& having issues with RF lens control Ring I have programmed it for Exposure compensation but it will not work on any RF lens I have tried including the Kit 18-150 lens not sure what is going on
I don't have delivery yet on mine. I have used it a lot on my R5. What mode are you shooting in? What other RF lens have you tried? I have mine set so it is not active unless I 1/2 push the shutter button. Is your exposure active when you are trying it? Have you set the control ring on the 18-150 to be control ring and not focus?
dj63401 wrote:
I don't have delivery yet on mine. I have used it a lot on my R5. What mode are you shooting in? What other RF lens have you tried? I have mine set so it is not active unless I 1/2 push the shutter button. Is your exposure active when you are trying it? Have you set the control ring on the 18-150 to be control ring and not focus?
Was going to suggest the same....I think it only works during half press to avoid inadvertent changes. Also be sure to test function in Av or Tv mode. In manual/auto-iso its hard to see if its working or not.
jedibrain wrote:
Don't have the 90D, but was previously looking at 5DIV vs R6. The major advantage of mirrorless is autofocus. Both accuracy and speed will blow away the 90D, as good as the 90D is. And then add in the eye tracking on top of that. And this is with all lenses, not jus the 10k ones. The AF system itself is more accurate because its testing focus at the image plane. 90D has the first gen of some of this tech in live view mode only, but the newest generation is a step change better. The only real drawback is battery life is shorter. If you're just taking snapshots of static subjects, and don't need the speed (FPS) or eye-tracking AF then it may not be worth it to you to go mirrorless. But...you wouldn't be saving a lot of money and buying something close to the end of its product cycle (90D).
I went R6. The speed was amazing and the AF astounding. For the same price as a camera that is in production but at the end of its life cycle (same as with the 90D). The only thing you need is an adapter.
Brian
...Show more →
Ok, thanks Brian,
I figured the accuracy and focus would blow away the 90D, just wanted to double check and get some opinions. Wish I didn't have to buy an adapter for the camera for all my lens'. I knew the 90D was close to the end as well but seems like it wasn't around for long. Can't find a USA 90D model anywhere for sale. ( can't find a R7 either, ). Was surprised to find a new 7D on the B&H site. I'm also surprised at how many RF lens' are for sale on the buy/sell page lately.
Bill Gass wrote:
Do any of you that just got the R7 have a 90D also ?
I'm on the fence between buying one or the other and curious how much if any better the R7 would be.
I know most cameras perform better with a 10k lens mounted to them.
I have the 90D and the M6II and received my R7 today. Been playing with the non-90D features and it seems like it will be a fun little camera. Whether it "blows the 90D away" depends on your intended use. We have 6 week old puppies and the face and eye tracking works quite well. If you will be shooting moving animals then the tracking is easier than the 90D. With the 90D and 80D before it, I used a small cluster of focus points and kept that on the animals face and I never had an issue with the process. The R's AF automatically selects, so you are dependent on it choosing wisely. With the puppies' twists and turns the AF would often get lost so its not a total game changer. The puppy face tracking also works well with the 4K 60p video. The 90D has nothing like that.
One new feature that I really like is the IBIS. I have a couple of non-IS lenses like the 60 macro that work well with the new IS support. It will be nice to use this lens with the focus bracketing feature hand held using the viewfinder.
My 90D feels a bit more natural with the EF 100-400 II but both work well. Its a heavy lens and the R7 grip feels up to the task. With the R7 the IS on the lens runs all the time unless you turn it off and then of course you can't see through the viewfinder. The on/off switch is conveniently located and there is virtually no lag time so I'll use that method to save battery.
It is way too early to tell if the R can replace my 90D, probably I'll keep both. The M6II is at higher risk since the R can do everything the M can with better face tracking. There are some M lenses I'd like to see adapted to the R mount. I'm expecting the image quality to be identical, i.e. excellent for APS-C.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
I have the 90D and the M6II and received my R7 today. Been playing with the non-90D features and it seems like it will be a fun little camera. Whether it "blows the 90D away" depends on your intended use. We have 6 week old puppies and the face and eye tracking works quite well. If you will be shooting moving animals then the tracking is easier than the 90D. With the 90D and 80D before it, I used a small cluster of focus points and kept that on the animals face and I never had an issue with the process. The R's AF automatically selects, so you are dependent on it choosing wisely. With the puppies' twists and turns the AF would often get lost so its not a total game changer. The puppy face tracking also works well with the 4K 60p video. The 90D has nothing like that.
One new feature that I really like is the IBIS. I have a couple of non-IS lenses like the 60 macro that work well with the new IS support. It will be nice to use this lens with the focus bracketing feature hand held using the viewfinder.
My 90D feels a bit more natural with the EF 100-400 II but both work well. Its a heavy lens and the R7 grip feels up to the task. With the R7 the IS on the lens runs all the time unless you turn it off and then of course you can't see through the viewfinder. The on/off switch is conveniently located and there is virtually no lag time so I'll use that method to save battery.
It is way too early to tell if the R can replace my 90D, probably I'll keep both. The M6II is at higher risk since the R can do everything the M can with better face tracking. There are some M lenses I'd like to see adapted to the R mount. I'm expecting the image quality to be identical, i.e. excellent for APS-C....Show more →
Thanks for all the feedback Jeff.
You can't go wrong playing with a new camera and new puppies. . Good luck.
R7 is sounding better and better.
Wonder how close all the camera stores are in pricing compared to each other...
I will miss the on camera flash, as noobie as that is I use it alot.
Canon has some small speedlights. I have the 270EX that is light and compact and you can point it up at the ceiling. Leave it in your pack until needed lightening the camera. I find I don't need flash often.
I'm coming to like the R7. I've taken a lot of images, but haven't seen them on my computer yet. Hopefully no bad surprises. I've tried many of my EF lenses and they all work well except my 24STM. I have the Sigma 100-400C which feels very ergonomic to me and performs quite well with the R's AF. But, as I say, I haven't processed the images. I'm pretty confident that IQ will equal the 90D.
Super light and image. Any higher ISO stuff to share? I'm routinely shooting at ISO's of >3200 with the 100-500 b/c of the f/stop. Also care to share the AF setup? Much appreciated.
armd wrote:
Super light and image. Any higher ISO stuff to share? I'm routinely shooting at ISO's of >3200 with the 100-500 b/c of the f/stop. Also care to share the AF setup? Much appreciated.
I don't like the R7 at higher ISOs.
Ended up just putting the camera in the widest area AF mode available, with case 2 or 3 (I alternate) and letting the camera do it's thing.
duncang wrote:
A brief spell with some swallows today. Some samples below.
Bear in mind one needs to spend days getting great keepers and it all starts with acquisition, tracking and getting some images in focus and the R7 does a great job of doing that - so keepers will come.
Eye AF works well and picked up the swallows eyes frequently while in flight and picks up bigger birds and small ducks in the water quite a long way off. Tracks birds in flight very well all over the frame no problem - I might have to agree with the Fro re performance vs Z9 - acquisition feels much better.
EVF is super nice with electronic shutter and easy to track swallows but blackout and initial lag is not great with mechanical shutter. Rolling shutter is a killer with swallows so most images are with mechanical shutter - pretty much every swallow in flight image is warped with electronic shutter.
Anyway with some work it is possible to get some good shots using mechanical shutter - which scared the heck out of the swallows in the beginning - they got used to it after a while. I shoot close up - 3 meters or less.
Acquisition fails completely against a busy background - if there is enough background separation then pre-focussing helps - but forget it if they are close to the background. Sony is much better at picking up moving things in the same position.
Detail is retained pretty well even at 1/4000s but cropping is just not really possible as the images fall apart (like most aps-c images) - so not much flexibility in post.
Highlight recovery is not great and no zebras for stills makes it more difficult to nail exposure. Try lowering the highlights on the Cormorant - maybe it is just DPP - but they seemed clipped to me. Histogram is useless since it does not tell you what part of the image is blown out.
BTW video animal AF works pretty well and you can see the tracking box as it hangs on to the swallows - unfortunately you really need 240fps for swallows - everything is very choppy at 120fps. But it should be great for slower birds.
I think most will be pretty pleased with the performance - definitely considering replacing the a6400/70-350 - just have to convince myself the extra bulk is worth it.
Ergonomics is really very nice - except for Zebras and one missing dial it could be better than my A1. 100-400 lens seems is nice and sharp.
Canon please do a stacked sensor aps-c and an aps-c 100-400 f/6.3 or even copy the Sony 70-350 f/6.3.
More images here with links to download RAW files.
Great information Duncan and thank you posting it along with sample RAW files. I have to agree with your analysis regarding IQ. The files clean up quite nicely in Topaz Denoise AI (ISO 3200) though as you indicated, they break down with cropping. Disappointing really, and I don't know whether this is attributable to the 100-400 RF lens or the sensor? I would be curious to see how it performs with a 100-500, 500 f/4, or 600 f/4 before pronouncing judgement on the R7 and I was hoping that it could breathe some new life into my longer primes so that I could ditch the TC's in lower light and gain the crop advantage. I really like my 100-500 with the R5 though it is a bit short and it needs a lot of light (with the TC it sits at f/10). The R7 with a 500 or 600 f/4 one could shoot at lower ISO's and have a 800 or 960 equivalent without a TC! Time will tell. Thanks again.
dj63401 wrote:
I don't have delivery yet on mine. I have used it a lot on my R5. What mode are you shooting in? What other RF lens have you tried? I have mine set so it is not active unless I 1/2 push the shutter button. Is your exposure active when you are trying it? Have you set the control ring on the 18-150 to be control ring and not focus?
Not sure if this is what you are asking but with the R7/RF100-400 the lens ring works fine when programmed with exposure compensation and camera set to Tv
armd wrote:
Great information Duncan and thank you posting it along with sample RAW files. I have to agree with your analysis regarding IQ. The files clean up quite nicely in Topaz Denoise AI (ISO 3200) though as you indicated, they break down with cropping. Disappointing really, and I don't know whether this is attributable to the 100-400 RF lens or the sensor? I would be curious to see how it performs with a 100-500, 500 f/4, or 600 f/4 before pronouncing judgement on the R7 and I was hoping that it could breathe some new life into my longer primes so that I could ditch the TC's in lower light and gain the crop advantage. I really like my 100-500 with the R5 though it is a bit short and it needs a lot of light (with the TC it sits at f/10). The R7 with a 500 or 600 f/4 one could shoot at lower ISO's and have a 800 or 960 equivalent without a TC! Time will tell. Thanks again....Show more →
Well I can't crop a cropped A1 image without the same happening so not really surprising. The biggest drawback of APS-C is you can't crop them - never been able to. So you have to fill the frame and compose perfectly - eye af certainly helps with the latter.
Bill Gass wrote:
Do any of you that just got the R7 have a 90D also ?
I'm on the fence between buying one or the other and curious how much if any better the R7 would be.
I know most cameras perform better with a 10k lens mounted to them.
I had a 90D for a few months and mostly used it in live view because the AF was so much better, more accurate, that way, than the traditional AF through the viewfinder. IMO, the 90D is a decent camera that would be a lot better if had an EVF. Which now is pretty much what the R7 is - a mirrorless 90D with some additional improvements. IOW, I wouldn't bother with the 90D if consistent AF performance is a priority.
rscheffler wrote:
I had a 90D for a few months and mostly used it in live view because the AF was so much better, more accurate, that way, than the traditional AF through the viewfinder. IMO, the 90D is a decent camera that would be a lot better if had an EVF. Which now is pretty much what the R7 is - a mirrorless 90D with some additional improvements. IOW, I wouldn't bother with the 90D if consistent AF performance is a priority.
Thanks for the info again guys...I need all the focus help I can get, .
Mirrorless is certainly the new way to go or the only way to go. The lens adapter or new RF lens are irritating tho.
Hopefully with the adapter it won't be an issue for any lens I have. I do like the looks and feel of the new RF lens tho, just need more $.
). Was surprised to find a new 7D on the B&H site. I'm also surprised at how many RF lens' are for sale on the buy/sell page lately.
I find I don't need flash often.
