maybe I missed it, but it's worth articulating that the reason the R7 is softer compared to the R6 is not a direct consequence of the sensor size, but the sensor size in conjunction with the lens. The R6 takes full advantage of the lens, whereas the R7 only captures a portion of it, effectively zooming in and getting a softer image as a result. It would've been good to try it with a lens designed for crop sensors such as the Sigma 18-35.
Is this why when I use the 35 mm 1.8 on my Canon RP and my Canon r7 and I must admit I love it better on the Canon RP. But when I put my sigma 18 to 35 onto my Canon r7 or my sigma 50 to 100 1.8 sigma on my r7 which is a crop sensor lens. The photos look amazing. I even tried this with the ef70 to 200 and it looks significantly better on a Canon RP, but I usually only use the 70-200 on r7 for wildlife
I don't see how 'zooming in' with a full frame lens on a crop sensor camera like the R7 is why supposedly the image is softer. Using only part of the lens with a ff lens on a crop sensor takes the aberration and vignetting at the edges out of play.
I appreciate your the only one on YT that put a 50mm 1.2 on the R7. I seen other videos where they compare the r7 with a rf 1.8 to a R5 with 1.2 but they never switch the lenses lol. Thank you for this!
Thanks James, absolutely loved your no-nonsense approach. The video has valuable information for people who are on the edge with choosing which limitation to ultimately settle with. (low megapixel of R6, lowRes EVF of R7, super high price of R5 etc).
I honestly like the look of 35mm f1.8 over the 50mm. The bokeh in the 50 had very hard bokeh lines. But the 35mm, although soft; has better character to it’s look
Even if many users are so much fan of the r7, i made the same experience than you did. Most of my Photos i take with the R5 and RF 24-70 2.8 and i thought the R7 would be a good Backup with the benefit of 1.6 crop and 32 MP. My wife bought the R10 and i was impressed about autofocus and sharpness of this small little camera. The more i was disapointed when my R7 arrived and we made the first portrait shoots. None of the pictures where really sharp. Zooming to the eyes by 100% showed a very soft image, so i made endless tests to find the error. I tried high shutter speeds, tried shots from tripod without stabiliser, always the same result. If someone thinks the comparison with the R5 is unfair, i did exactly the same tests against the R6 which i also own. Same results, the R6 shows a crispy sharp image with more details than the R7 even the R10 showed better results. I think i will send this body to canon service just to see if i did get a bad sample. If the quality consists on this level that i see and canon says that this is normal the R7 and i will go separate ways again.
@@JamesReader The camera is just back from canon with the answer that there was no error found. I tested it again with portraits and, you won`t believe it, the autofocus works fine, the pictures are sharp. self-healing by mail or ist there something canon does not like to talk about? One thing i wonder about is that most youtubers use lightroom for RAW development. This is in my experience the worst choice for canon bodies, in particular when they are new. To get the best results out of a raw with low or normal ISO take capture one and you think you have a new and much better camera, for high iso DXO is best choice. Everything else you can do with lightroom and photoshop, but don´t use them to develop raws. For low budget work the free DPP4 is very slow but also much better than Adobe. The downside are the filesizes, a 16bit comes easily to 200MB or more. Quality has it's price.
I didn't test it yet, but aparently the soft focus is an issue of the 1.2.0 firmware, i just found a video with the fix, hope this help ruclips.net/video/JblJFQcZFu4/видео.html
It would have been more useful to apply the crop factor to the aperture as well to get the same depth of field and look. For example 50mm on the R7 should compare at F1.2 with f2.0 on the 85mm on FF. That will give you an equivalency to do a fair comparison. Then, If you want to contrast them and show the advantage of FF, let the 85 stretch it’s legs at a wider aperture.
Thanks for the feedback Ian. I think there’s quite a lot of videos on RUclips making this kind of comparison of full frame vs apsc. I just wanted to test the best RF portrait lenses at their full potential on each camera to see how they differ in look and performance. Thank you for watching!
My R is still a solid camera next to my R6. I thought about switching my R for an R7, but quickly changed my mind. Since I do mostly weddings and event photography, shooting fullframe is actually a real advantage.
@@ElBoyoElectronico I always photograph with crop. I want the R7 but just can’t seem to decide between the 15-35 2.8 or 24-70 2.8 for portraits. I also go against the norm and use zooms lol
Finally i watched a video knows that r7 is producing images. I watched a lot about how it is fast or bla bla...Thank you very much for the qulity of your review.
In my opinion, this video was one of the best R7 reviews on the internet I agree 100% with all your comments and you did a great job Especially in the photo section Disappointing noise performance has made this camera useless for many people On paper R7 looks extremely powerful But in the real world Even Old Eos R or Rp is a better camera in many ways
The EOS R for photography for me is the absolute best option for its price. The only flaw is the horrible video crop. But the R is one of my preferred cameras for photography for sure
What I noticed was focus blur and not missed focus. Shooting APS-C sensors with compact small photosites requires a very steady hand or tripod because any slight jerk of camera will cause the pixels to blur. With all of my bodies, its almost without fail that you have to shoot the APS-C counterpart to FF at higher shutter speeds to avoid this phenomenon.
Very strange results. I've found the R7, with much cheaper lenses than yours, producing VERY sharp images and surprisingly clean images for APS-C (only about a stop behind FF, sometimes less). My friend added an R7 as a second body to his R and we're surprised how much sharper the R7 images are, generally.
I've now used 3 different R7's and had mostly the same results. It's a good, sharp camera and it's very demanding on most full frame lenses. The 35mm is the only lens I have been unhappy with on the few R7's I have used.
LOVE your review style. This was a perfect combo of imagery and specs comparison and examples. Thank you. Would love to see more reviews on r7/r6/r5c canon cams and post workflow. Thanks again! ***The photo performance with the 35mm and r7 was really surprising :/… but for video r7/r6 matched perfectly.
@@filmingyu6623 Wow thank you for the kind words! I was surprised with the 35mm performance too. My next video planned is with the 24mm 1.8, looking forward to seeing how that performs! Thank you for watching.
@@JamesReader Looking forward to your 24mm rf 1.8 w/ R7 review. That's the combo I'm interested in most (closest to a 35mm/38mm equivalent on the R7) Hope it doesn't performs poorly as the 35mm. We shall see. Thank you so much!
Really interesting real world comparison, not the first time I’ve seen the comment about the camera apparently tracking eyes but these being found soft later. Definitely a good example why the L series lens have their reputation. I have the R7 as a “B” cam to my R5 but can honestly say at less than 40% of the price of an R5 its a very worthy and well rounded B !!
…on my R5 and R6, the 35mm f/1.8 is pin sharp, always… the fairly mediocre results which the R7 achieves in those reviews do sit in the camera, respectively in the miss match of camera and lens…
The RF APS-C cameras will be pointless for the most part until Canon puts out some purpose-built APS-C lenses that are fast, sharp, solid, compact, and a tad cheaper...the reasons to have a smaller sensor to begin with. I'm a fan of APS-C and MFT, but if you're stuck with only bulky full frame lenses on the mount then there's not really any point outside of exclusively needing the crop factor (Canon's is 1.6 compared to most other APS-C at 1.5). There needs to be an RF equivalent of at least the EF-M 32/1.4, 22/2, and the Sigma 56/1.4...which could have been handled by Sigma if Canon didn't ban third party lenses on RF. It's almost like they don't want the APS-C gap in lenses filled, weird. Nikon didn't ban third party, but with the Z50/fc both being a bit outdated (my D500 from 2016 isn't far off) on launch you're left with Fujifilm for a strong APS-C option (Sony exists but for the most part is the same "here's a couple overpriced APS-C lenses, buy full frame lenses and then buy a full frame body" logic, they just have the bonus of third party helping out) but they charge high knowing the cult will pay and even before the pandemic couldn't/wouldn't produce enough cameras to keep shops from being permanently out of stock or so short on stock they charged markups (including Fuji themselves charging as high as 2400 I saw for an X100V on their store for a 1200 msrp camera, talk about bs). I'm content with my GX85, GX8, and EM1.2 for MFT along with my M5 and A6500 for APS-C. The PanaLeica and Olympus lenses are great for MFT, the lenses listed prior for EF-M are solid with the M5/M50 (ii) or M6 (ii), and there's enough options with the A6500 that also has IBIS to make a great APS-C camera for a lot less than the R7. Shame, I quite like everything about the R7, it's just the BS approach to the RF platform that Canon has taken will probably kill the APS-C options.
The R7 can be more demanding on lenses, but there are many factors that come into play when looking at shallow DOF lenses. But also, I find, that just pixel peeping is not actually accurate. Take the R7 Raw image and downsample it with a good algorithm to 24mpx and then process and sharpen it. If you now pixel peep between the two images for the FF and the CF you will have a different opinion.
I suggest the R7 with a speedbooster and some F1.2 or 1.4 EF prime lenses. Some sharp top quality full frame images with a crop sensor. Your soft images are because your looking through the center of a full frame lens, rather than using he whole lens ability. A speed booster will allow the APSc sensor to see the full lense and all it's glory.
I don't know why, but my R7 can't take as sharp pic as my 70D, theres a lot of noise on the R7 pics, I have checked settings and everything, but still getting noisy pics compared with the 70D, in my head this doesn't make sense!
Thanks so much for this. Im thinking of getting one as a backup to my R6. Iv just downloaded your files and gone through my usual video routine to grade etc. Its looks insane!!
@@JamesReader ruclips.net/video/HFA14bNV-AE/видео.html I uploaded unlisted to check on different devices. It looks so nice. Was this shot in clog3? ND filter I assume?
A 50mm lens, on a Canon APS-C camera, gives an equivalent angle of view of a 80mm (not 75) lens on a 35mm camera; Canon APS-C cameras have a 1.6 crop factor, not 1.5.
@@JamesReader No worries. I'm currently a Fuji XH2S shooter, I was curious about other APS-C offerings from the big major three, I came to look at Canon (R7) and yours was one of the few videos to showcase what I thought was gonna be the biggest problem... dedicated APS-C lenses (to which they are few and far between). And even if you're crazy enough to throw money down the drain and buy FF lenses and use on APS-C... it's not a great result. Incompatible imo. It looks to being similar issues with Fuji's 40mp sensor, some of the older lenses Fuji have stated are not really gonna show a benefit at all on the newer sensor. Sure you can use it, but will you appreciate a perceptible boost in resolution and detail (with these lenses that don't make the list/cut), prolly not... So buy lenses that make the list if choosing the newer sensor as they will have been designed as such to take advantage of this. I'm left very perplexed at Canon (R7), I don't really understand why it exists. They closed the mount off to 3rd party and the only RF-S lenses that exist are kinda bland travel lenses (which don't line up with the ethos of the camera), where are the fast RF-S Primes? I can get a XF56/1.2 for $1400, small, sharp and light, but I have to pay 3x more for a FF behemoth that won't even work that well?! What are Canon doing...? Close the mount, fine. But get cracking on the development side. I would already own a R7 if there were decent priced 23, 33 and 56mm RF-S primes available... 🤔
Your images on the 35 1.8 would have been sharper if you had used the viewfinder bracing the camera against your face helps keep jiggle out of the camera body and leads to a shaper image than trying to hold the camera steady with your arms extended and using the flippy screen.
To be honest, when I look at photos r7 vs r6 I prefer the softer look of r7. I really dont like the overly detailed skin on models, it doesnt do them justice. So I guess r7 has it's benefits.
The problem with full frame lenses on crop sensors is always the same. Lenses are designed and calibrated for the sensor size they're intended for. This means any flaws in the lens are going to be exacerbated because of the crop. Any softness in the lens will be more apparent. It's a big reason why many who shoot with APSC recommend using APSC lenses. Great video, and the photos were awesome!
Isn’t it true that an aps-c produces better results with full frame lenses, because they only use the central (better) part of the lens? I would expect full frame lenses to out perform aps-c lenses, the downsize being weight and size, of course!?
I use Canon 16-35 F2.8 L on R7 and the images are beautiful, but I also use Sigma 18-35 F1.8 crop lens and the photos are just WOW. Now the Sigma lens will stay on R7 for a long time... :)
The presenter clearly doesn’t understand Canon’s APS-C crop factor, doing the conversions incorrectly at 1.5 rather than 1.6. The presenters claims the 85mm is 125 on the crop but is actually 136. He claims 50mm is 75 on the crop but is actually 80mm etc.
Did you ever tried the R7 in a studio for portraits ? i sometimes use it instead of my R5 in the studio and the photos of the R7 are very sharp in combination with EF L lenses. 🍻
2 Things First Cripple Hammer on the shutter it’s horrible too much vibration and second they need to update and fix the render issue for a camera that have ibis that should compensate for that shutter
Thank you! Personally I much preferred my R6 over the R7. I can see how the R7 could have benefits for wild life but for everything else I really did prefer the files from the R6
I fear the same! I think Canon market these cameras mainly at those who want more reach and are likely to use a full frame zoom anyway. I hope to at least see a few light weight primes, like the EFS 22 f2 lens.
I wonder if the 35mm F/1.8's resolving power is diffraction-limited on a camera with the pixel density of the R7. 32.5MP on APS-C yields a ridiculously-tiny pixel pitch... Would be interesting to compare the 32.5MP images scaled down to the equivalent 20MP of the R6. I am guessing they would appear similarly-sharp (though I could be wrong).
Very weird behaviour of this camera R7 with rf35mm 1.8 hmm 🤔 resolution etc not match or on the other hand maybe shake from ibis or shutter? I’m also not sure but interesting to see this! I had used 35mm rf 1.8 on R6 and it a was ok! But here on R7… 😱
Great video. Thanks for your effort. The question is whether it still makes sense to buy a Canon APS-C camera in 2022. I think it makes sense to either buy the RP for pure portrait photography or spend more money right away and buy the better equipped R6 or R5.
Completely agree! The R7 could be a good option for video if they release the right lenses (new 24mm 1.8 could be good). For portraits however the EOS R/RP are just too good value. Thank you for watching!
Nah for portraits I'd go straight full frame like the R5. For video tho the C70 looks so much better here, especially the skin tones textures and the overall image..
I’m having a hard time finding a comparison between the Rf 24mm 1.8 vs the 15-35 2.8 on the R7. Im primarily looking at both these for night club photography - which the 1.8 would be superior in low light… but the 15-35 should have better image quality? May I get your thoughts?
I actually just tested these two against each other using a few lens charts. The RF 24mm 1.8 is a bit sharper wide open than the 15-35 at 24mm. At 2.8 it’s much sharper. You’ll get a bit more reach with the 15-35, but it’s not the strongest lens at 35mm and the flaws are exaggerated on the R7. I’ve found the 24mm to be one of the best wide angle lenses in terms of image quality on the R7, I feel Canon intentionally made the centre very strong so it performs well on the R7.
Your pinky would fit the grip quite well if you put your index finger on the shutter. Isn't this how you are supposed to hold the camera or am I doing it wrong?
It’s going to be different for everybody. I still have the R7 now and even with my index in the button my pinky isn’t fully on the grip compared to my other R cameras. Today I’m using the R7 all day only for video, so in that case my finger won’t be hovering over the shutter either, but I can rig it up with a top handle or side grip anyway.
When using full frame lenses, a full frame camera is always preferable. Even the lowly RP will produce better images than the R7 with these lenses. For photography - go with the original R if you can afford it or even with the RP. At this moment Canon simply has no lenses for the crop RF cameras. Then again - if video is the main usage, this camera makes much more sense. But for photos - stay away from it. Especially at this price point.
I sold my 35mm because I was having too many focusing issues with the RP and R7. After that, I only opted for the premium L series lenses that are much bigger and have never failed me. I do miss having a small lens. Did you ever have any focusing issues with the 24mm on the R7?
The Canon RF50mm f1.2 and RF85mm f1.2 are both very expensive "L" series lenses, while the RF35mm f1.8 is a much less expensive lens and definitely not an "L" lens. I don't know why anyone would be surprised at the image quality difference?
Rereading this post it could be misunderstood as a slam against James, which is never my intention. James is a wonderful resource for photography and I have great respect for his knowledge and abilities, as well as his relatability and patience with users at all levels. Please consider this as you read my original comment above. The RF 35mm f1.8 is just a really poor choice for Canon R crop bodies like the EOS R7 and EOS R10.
You'll love it! I've used it a lot since this video and the RF 35mm is the only lens where I wasn't too happy with the results. The new 24mm 1.8 is great on it for example.
I think you'll be happy with it. APS-C sensors have very tight and small photosites. This causes any slight shake to cause motion blur. What I noticed here with examples was more of that phenomenon than actually not "focusing". When shooting hand held at lower shutter speeds, you'll have to be more mindful of camera shake (regardless of IBIS) and possibly use a slightly higher shutter speed than normal to prevent. Good luck!
I can easily tell the lack of detail because of lower bitrate on the R7 some parts are mushy, but at a glance it almost is identical. R6 is better imo. (It could have been a bit out of focused to give the r7 credit)
Looked to me like you underexposed and shot with low shutter speeds for a very small pixel size sensor. Many of the focus problems I saw in your examples were typical of shake with APS-C sensors since there pixels are so much smaller and tightly packed.
@AndrewCCM - It's a 35mm (56mm equivalent) lens that has IS, being used with a camera that has IBIS, how is it possible that 1/200 is not completely adequate to get a sharp image with that focal range?
The R7 is a great choice for video. Pair it up with one of the kit lenses to start or look at the upcoming 24mm 1.8 along with the 50mm 1.8 could be a good combo.
I prefer the 50mm 1.2. Only because I find it an easier focal length to work with on a crop sensor camera. Both are amazing on the R7 though, just personal preference.
Thank you. I haven't had a dslr since my old 550D. I need to take pictures of small objects like rings, bracelets or necklace with & without a model. I already have 50mm 1.8 EF and 18-55 EFS kit lens. I'm realy confused. I will shoot videos but photography will be the main aspects. I will focus on the accessories rather than the model. I will need to buy extra lenses but I need to use my money wisely. Shoul I go with Eos R or RP with better lenses or buy an R6 or R7 and stick to their kit lens for a while alongf with my old EF lenses.
All I want…. All I want to see is a video test with the ibis paired with the 35 1.8 IS on the R7…. But I can’t find any RUclipsrs doing it 😩 could you do one more in depth or more tests please? Hell, if you just do an instagram or YT Short testing it out more please!!!
I'll do my best to test with it - is there anything you are concerned about in particular with the combo? I use this lens with R5, R6 and C70 for video all the time and it's excellent. Lots of the B Roll on this channel is shot with that lens.
@@JamesReader so I do documentary style work and I want to essentially get an R7 to replace my c100 mkii when I’m doing handheld shooting and tracking. I want to see how good the ibis and IS are together. Specifically for the R7 and 35mm combo. If you could do both a vertical shooting test and a horizontal one of maybe tracking a subject walking, sitting while you get face detailed shots in 24p and 60p that would be magnificent!
Would it be safe to say that if you own an R7 and are using the full frame RF glass, that the L series will perform much better on the crop sensor? I have an R10 and was looking at going to an R7 or R6 Mark II to gain the dual card slots, but trying to justify the price difference in the bodies.
can I use the same rule for cannon R7 with 18-150mm lens? Or May I know the rule of portrait for cannon R7 with AF-18-150mm lens. I don.t have prime lens.
I think that would be around a 28mm - 240mm focal length range in full frame equivalent so you have access to all the great focal lengths for portraits and more.
I'm looking to buy the Canon R7. I'm a hybrid shooter, who specifically shoots portraits among other things. I'm looking to go for the Canon 35mm F1.8 & the Canon 85 F2 lenses. would you reccomennd those for this camera? Also this is really informative
They could work! However I would hold out and maybe consider the new RF 24mm 1.8 over the 35mm as it will give you a wider, more versatile frame of view for environmental portraits. Then pair it with either the 50mm 1.8 or the 85mm f2 - whichever focal length you prefer for more classic portrait shots. Hope that helps
@@JamesReader I'll definitely research more on the Canon RF 24mm F1.8 lense. I'm doing a lot of research on looking into good lenses to go in on when I do upgrade to the R7. Thank you for all of the information you have on this and you're reccomendations.
Man, what amazing video! One of the best style of comparison. If you plis, can do the same comparison but with some APSC lenses, like 18-35 1.8 from Sigma, to see if the softness continues. Thanks and keep up with the great work.
@@JamesReader Another option if you could. If you use the 0.71 adapter with the full frame lenses, the softness will stay the same? And using the apsc lenses too? 😁 Thanks a lot. I'm wondering to buy the R7 with the 18-35 f1.8, that's why the questions 😅
I use Canon FF lens 16-35 F2.8 L or 24-70 F2.8L on R7 and the images are beautiful, I also use Sigma 18-35 F1.8 crop lens and the photos are just WOW. Photos from Sigma lens are very sharp and the color is just crazy... Now the Sigma lens will stay on R7 for a long time... :)
For an APSC camera? Definitely Sony due to having way more lens choices. But personally prefer Fujifilm in that format. In general I prefer Canon to Sony mainly because of the ergonomics. Sony has great lens choices in general. Can’t go wrong with either.
I sold my eos r and got a c200 but I wanted to get a r7 so a b cam for video and for whenever I shoot pics but I also have a metabones speed booster for the rf mount I was wondering if you think the speed booster would be a good addition to the r7 I only have ef full frame lenses out side of the sigma 18-35mm
Still tryna decide what I want would you recommend the r6 over the r7 to go with my c200 I do primarily video but still love taking photos of my family kids and travel
Thanks for making this video. One thing though: Why is the r7 better for video than stills? Weren’t you using the same lenses? I do recall another reviewer saying that shutter shock is an issue with the r7 ( compared to the r6/5) so I’m wondering if this might be at the heart of your observation. Thanks!
Thank you for watching! It’s not necessarily that the R7 is better for video than stills, it’s just that if your focus is still photography I think your money is better spent on the EOS R or RP. For video though, this is the best bang for buck in Canons line up (other than maybe the R10 but I haven’t tried that yet)
@@JamesReader if i may, the real best bang for buck is actually, IMHO of course 🙂 the M6 Mark II, which coupled with EF adapter (and why not, even a speedbooster) features uncropped full sensor 4k video with DPAF; It's the only M camera to do it, and i think it was the first Canon camera ever, Cinema line excluded, to have an uncropped sensor 4k AND the Dual Pixel AF with eye tracking enabled in 4k. I don't think it so inferior (if inferior at all) to the R10 (the former has also a richer mpx sensor) or even to the R7, pixel peeping of course some difference can be found, but reproducing on a screen i'm sure there's no visible difference. And an M6 Mark II cost around 600€ used, which is around 40% less then an R10, and less then half of an R7.
Could be some focus issues with the 35mm. I shot hundreds of images on the day though with similar quality throughout unfortunately. Much better quality from the other lenses.
One of the better videos out there on comparison. Someone that actually takes pictures! The other youtubers just read out specs when comparing.
Thank you Carlos!
Good to see actual quality comparison for this type of photography. Not just endless bird comparisons!
Thank you John
maybe I missed it, but it's worth articulating that the reason the R7 is softer compared to the R6 is not a direct consequence of the sensor size, but the sensor size in conjunction with the lens. The R6 takes full advantage of the lens, whereas the R7 only captures a portion of it, effectively zooming in and getting a softer image as a result. It would've been good to try it with a lens designed for crop sensors such as the Sigma 18-35.
Is this why when I use the 35 mm 1.8 on my Canon RP and my Canon r7 and I must admit I love it better on the Canon RP. But when I put my sigma 18 to 35 onto my Canon r7 or my sigma 50 to 100 1.8 sigma on my r7 which is a crop sensor lens. The photos look amazing. I even tried this with the ef70 to 200 and it looks significantly better on a Canon RP, but I usually only use the 70-200 on r7 for wildlife
@@morelivethanyou is the 50-100 1.8 good?
I have the R7 as my Second camera and im thinking about buying it
I don't see how 'zooming in' with a full frame lens on a crop sensor camera like the R7 is why supposedly the image is softer. Using only part of the lens with a ff lens on a crop sensor takes the aberration and vignetting at the edges out of play.
I appreciate your the only one on YT that put a 50mm 1.2 on the R7. I seen other videos where they compare the r7 with a rf 1.8 to a R5 with 1.2 but they never switch the lenses lol. Thank you for this!
Thanks James, absolutely loved your no-nonsense approach. The video has valuable information for people who are on the edge with choosing which limitation to ultimately settle with. (low megapixel of R6, lowRes EVF of R7, super high price of R5 etc).
Thank you Zahreela
Content, model, your work.
They are all great. Congrats.
Thank you!
I honestly like the look of 35mm f1.8 over the 50mm. The bokeh in the 50 had very hard bokeh lines. But the 35mm, although soft; has better character to it’s look
Even if many users are so much fan of the r7, i made the same experience than you did. Most of my Photos i take with the R5 and RF 24-70 2.8 and i thought the R7 would be a good Backup with the benefit of 1.6 crop and 32 MP. My wife bought the R10 and i was impressed about autofocus and sharpness of this small little camera. The more i was disapointed when my R7 arrived and we made the first portrait shoots. None of the pictures where really sharp. Zooming to the eyes by 100% showed a very soft image, so i made endless tests to find the error. I tried high shutter speeds, tried shots from tripod without stabiliser, always the same result. If someone thinks the comparison with the R5 is unfair, i did exactly the same tests against the R6 which i also own. Same results, the R6 shows a crispy sharp image with more details than the R7 even the R10 showed better results. I think i will send this body to canon service just to see if i did get a bad sample. If the quality consists on this level that i see and canon says that this is normal the R7 and i will go separate ways again.
Interesting to hear you had a similar experience. let me know if Canon manage to sort it out!
@@JamesReader The camera is just back from canon with the answer that there was no error found. I tested it again with portraits and, you won`t believe it, the autofocus works fine, the pictures are sharp. self-healing by mail or ist there something canon does not like to talk about? One thing i wonder about is that most youtubers use lightroom for RAW development. This is in my experience the worst choice for canon bodies, in particular when they are new. To get the best results out of a raw with low or normal ISO take capture one and you think you have a new and much better camera, for high iso DXO is best choice. Everything else you can do with lightroom and photoshop, but don´t use them to develop raws. For low budget work the free DPP4 is very slow but also much better than Adobe. The downside are the filesizes, a 16bit comes easily to 200MB or more. Quality has it's price.
I didn't test it yet, but aparently the soft focus is an issue of the 1.2.0 firmware, i just found a video with the fix, hope this help ruclips.net/video/JblJFQcZFu4/видео.html
@@GalacticoUC did the autofocus issue get resolved after the firmware update?
It would have been more useful to apply the crop factor to the aperture as well to get the same depth of field and look. For example 50mm on the R7 should compare at F1.2 with f2.0 on the 85mm on FF. That will give you an equivalency to do a fair comparison.
Then, If you want to contrast them and show the advantage of FF, let the 85 stretch it’s legs at a wider aperture.
Thanks for the feedback Ian. I think there’s quite a lot of videos on RUclips making this kind of comparison of full frame vs apsc. I just wanted to test the best RF portrait lenses at their full potential on each camera to see how they differ in look and performance. Thank you for watching!
@@JamesReader Fair enough!
My R is still a solid camera next to my R6. I thought about switching my R for an R7, but quickly changed my mind. Since I do mostly weddings and event photography, shooting fullframe is actually a real advantage.
The R is amazing - that's a great combo. Thank you for watching!
I'll be trading my R for an R7. I just don't agree with the full frame advantage
@@jujub5557 after recently starting birding, I might do the same after all.
@@ElBoyoElectronico I always photograph with crop. I want the R7 but just can’t seem to decide between the 15-35 2.8 or 24-70 2.8 for portraits. I also go against the norm and use zooms lol
Finally i watched a video knows that r7 is producing images. I watched a lot about how it is fast or bla bla...Thank you very much for the qulity of your review.
Thank you Sorma!
This is a channel that's worth subscribing for, thanks for the honesty!
Thank you Josue!
In my opinion, this video was one of the best R7 reviews on the internet
I agree 100% with all your comments and you did a great job
Especially in the photo section
Disappointing noise performance has made this camera useless for many people
On paper R7 looks extremely powerful
But in the real world
Even Old Eos R or Rp is a better camera in many ways
That’s really kind of you to say, thank you Nathan. Agree with your comments also regarding the R7
The EOS R for photography for me is the absolute best option for its price. The only flaw is the horrible video crop. But the R is one of my preferred cameras for photography for sure
100% agree with this
What I noticed was focus blur and not missed focus. Shooting APS-C sensors with compact small photosites requires a very steady hand or tripod because any slight jerk of camera will cause the pixels to blur. With all of my bodies, its almost without fail that you have to shoot the APS-C counterpart to FF at higher shutter speeds to avoid this phenomenon.
Very strange results. I've found the R7, with much cheaper lenses than yours, producing VERY sharp images and surprisingly clean images for APS-C (only about a stop behind FF, sometimes less).
My friend added an R7 as a second body to his R and we're surprised how much sharper the R7 images are, generally.
I've now used 3 different R7's and had mostly the same results. It's a good, sharp camera and it's very demanding on most full frame lenses. The 35mm is the only lens I have been unhappy with on the few R7's I have used.
Can you share please wich lenses do you mean?
LOVE your review style. This was a perfect combo of imagery and specs comparison and examples. Thank you. Would love to see more reviews on r7/r6/r5c canon cams and post workflow. Thanks again! ***The photo performance with the 35mm and r7 was really surprising :/… but for video r7/r6 matched perfectly.
Will you consider reviewing the new 24mm RF (non L) when it comes out with the r7/r6/r5/c70 like this?
@@filmingyu6623 Wow thank you for the kind words! I was surprised with the 35mm performance too. My next video planned is with the 24mm 1.8, looking forward to seeing how that performs! Thank you for watching.
@@JamesReader Looking forward to your 24mm rf 1.8 w/ R7 review. That's the combo I'm interested in most (closest to a 35mm/38mm equivalent on the R7) Hope it doesn't performs poorly as the 35mm. We shall see. Thank you so much!
Really interesting real world comparison, not the first time I’ve seen the comment about the camera apparently tracking eyes but these being found soft later. Definitely a good example why the L series lens have their reputation. I have the R7 as a “B” cam to my R5 but can honestly say at less than 40% of the price of an R5 its a very worthy and well rounded B !!
…on my R5 and R6, the 35mm f/1.8 is pin sharp, always… the fairly mediocre results which the R7 achieves in those reviews do sit in the camera, respectively in the miss match of camera and lens…
Thanks James, great review - all aspects I was looking for are covered with nice sample footage!
Your images are soft with R7 because of the Mechanical shutter. If changed to electronic, it is excellent and sharp.
The RF APS-C cameras will be pointless for the most part until Canon puts out some purpose-built APS-C lenses that are fast, sharp, solid, compact, and a tad cheaper...the reasons to have a smaller sensor to begin with. I'm a fan of APS-C and MFT, but if you're stuck with only bulky full frame lenses on the mount then there's not really any point outside of exclusively needing the crop factor (Canon's is 1.6 compared to most other APS-C at 1.5). There needs to be an RF equivalent of at least the EF-M 32/1.4, 22/2, and the Sigma 56/1.4...which could have been handled by Sigma if Canon didn't ban third party lenses on RF. It's almost like they don't want the APS-C gap in lenses filled, weird. Nikon didn't ban third party, but with the Z50/fc both being a bit outdated (my D500 from 2016 isn't far off) on launch you're left with Fujifilm for a strong APS-C option (Sony exists but for the most part is the same "here's a couple overpriced APS-C lenses, buy full frame lenses and then buy a full frame body" logic, they just have the bonus of third party helping out) but they charge high knowing the cult will pay and even before the pandemic couldn't/wouldn't produce enough cameras to keep shops from being permanently out of stock or so short on stock they charged markups (including Fuji themselves charging as high as 2400 I saw for an X100V on their store for a 1200 msrp camera, talk about bs).
I'm content with my GX85, GX8, and EM1.2 for MFT along with my M5 and A6500 for APS-C. The PanaLeica and Olympus lenses are great for MFT, the lenses listed prior for EF-M are solid with the M5/M50 (ii) or M6 (ii), and there's enough options with the A6500 that also has IBIS to make a great APS-C camera for a lot less than the R7. Shame, I quite like everything about the R7, it's just the BS approach to the RF platform that Canon has taken will probably kill the APS-C options.
Try turning off the stabilization and any lens correction on the 35mm. I found it works better with everything switched off..
The R7 can be more demanding on lenses, but there are many factors that come into play when looking at shallow DOF lenses. But also, I find, that just pixel peeping is not actually accurate. Take the R7 Raw image and downsample it with a good algorithm to 24mpx and then process and sharpen it. If you now pixel peep between the two images for the FF and the CF you will have a different opinion.
I need results with the 50mm f1.8 rf 😢
I suggest the R7 with a speedbooster and some F1.2 or 1.4 EF prime lenses.
Some sharp top quality full frame images with a crop sensor. Your soft images are because your looking through the center of a full frame lens, rather than using he whole lens ability. A speed booster will allow the APSc sensor to see the full lense and all it's glory.
Thank you. The review I was actually expecting.
I don't know why, but my R7 can't take as sharp pic as my 70D, theres a lot of noise on the R7 pics, I have checked settings and everything, but still getting noisy pics compared with the 70D, in my head this doesn't make sense!
70D has a lot less pixels therefore they are bigger and collect more light
You're doing something wrong. I just upgraded from the 80d and it's insane the quality difference.
Thanks so much for this. Im thinking of getting one as a backup to my R6. Iv just downloaded your files and gone through my usual video routine to grade etc. Its looks insane!!
Thank you for watching! Glad the files helped - the video from the R7 is excellent
@@JamesReader ruclips.net/video/HFA14bNV-AE/видео.html I uploaded unlisted to check on different devices. It looks so nice. Was this shot in clog3? ND filter I assume?
Awesome video mate and daym, that location!
Thank you Brad!
Thanks for this great video - was thinking of R7 as second body .. but now wont consider it
A 50mm lens, on a Canon APS-C camera, gives an equivalent angle of view of a 80mm (not 75) lens on a 35mm camera; Canon APS-C cameras have a 1.6 crop factor, not 1.5.
Thank you, this was very informative and helped me with my buying decisions (or lack of rather).
Thank you for watching!
@@JamesReader No worries.
I'm currently a Fuji XH2S shooter, I was curious about other APS-C offerings from the big major three, I came to look at Canon (R7) and yours was one of the few videos to showcase what I thought was gonna be the biggest problem... dedicated APS-C lenses (to which they are few and far between). And even if you're crazy enough to throw money down the drain and buy FF lenses and use on APS-C... it's not a great result. Incompatible imo.
It looks to being similar issues with Fuji's 40mp sensor, some of the older lenses Fuji have stated are not really gonna show a benefit at all on the newer sensor. Sure you can use it, but will you appreciate a perceptible boost in resolution and detail (with these lenses that don't make the list/cut), prolly not... So buy lenses that make the list if choosing the newer sensor as they will have been designed as such to take advantage of this.
I'm left very perplexed at Canon (R7), I don't really understand why it exists. They closed the mount off to 3rd party and the only RF-S lenses that exist are kinda bland travel lenses (which don't line up with the ethos of the camera), where are the fast RF-S Primes? I can get a XF56/1.2 for $1400, small, sharp and light, but I have to pay 3x more for a FF behemoth that won't even work that well?! What are Canon doing...?
Close the mount, fine. But get cracking on the development side. I would already own a R7 if there were decent priced 23, 33 and 56mm RF-S primes available... 🤔
Absolutely brilliant work
Thank you!
Your images on the 35 1.8 would have been sharper if you had used the viewfinder bracing the camera against your face helps keep jiggle out of the camera body and leads to a shaper image than trying to hold the camera steady with your arms extended and using the flippy screen.
Thank you for video and provided files > really help me to check quality. Great job!
Thank you Tomas- glad the files helped!
To be honest, when I look at photos r7 vs r6 I prefer the softer look of r7. I really dont like the overly detailed skin on models, it doesnt do them justice. So I guess r7 has it's benefits.
Então você gosta de imagem fake!
The problem with full frame lenses on crop sensors is always the same. Lenses are designed and calibrated for the sensor size they're intended for. This means any flaws in the lens are going to be exacerbated because of the crop. Any softness in the lens will be more apparent. It's a big reason why many who shoot with APSC recommend using APSC lenses. Great video, and the photos were awesome!
Thank you Joshua!
Isn’t it true that an aps-c produces better results with full frame lenses, because they only use the central (better) part of the lens? I would expect full frame lenses to out perform aps-c lenses, the downsize being weight and size, of course!?
@@raylander6329 Yes. Joshua is mistaken.
I use Canon 16-35 F2.8 L on R7 and the images are beautiful, but I also use Sigma 18-35 F1.8 crop lens and the photos are just WOW. Now the Sigma lens will stay on R7 for a long time... :)
Enhorabuena por el trabajo James! Me suscribo. un saludo desde España amigo 🤝
¡Muchas gracias!
The presenter clearly doesn’t understand Canon’s APS-C crop factor, doing the conversions incorrectly at 1.5 rather than 1.6.
The presenters claims the 85mm is 125 on the crop but is actually 136. He claims 50mm is 75 on the crop but is actually 80mm etc.
Did you ever tried the R7 in a studio for portraits ? i sometimes use it instead of my R5 in the studio and the photos of the R7 are very sharp in combination with EF L lenses. 🍻
Thank you for this video, and especially for the RAW footage download
You’re very welcome, thank you for watching.
For the video, did you use 35mm lens ? Or another lens ? Thank you :)
@@disclosureproductions for the video comparison part it was all with the 15-35 2.8
Excellent review! Thanks for sharing.
Thank you Daniel!
2 Things First Cripple Hammer on the shutter it’s horrible too much vibration and second they need to update and fix the render issue for a camera that have ibis that should compensate for that shutter
Great video, James! Thank you!
Thank you so much!
Thank you for tNice tutorials very clear and concise tutorial. Look forward to more videos from u
Thank you!
Awesome video! Exactly my dilemma: R7 or R6. Mostly R7 (wildlife, architecture, vacations), but what about portraits? Thank you!
Thank you! Personally I much preferred my R6 over the R7. I can see how the R7 could have benefits for wild life but for everything else I really did prefer the files from the R6
I think all the softness in de Pictures are from the mechanical schutter with first curtain oder electronic you dont get this problems
Awesome considerations. 🔥🔥🔥
I was so hyped on that r7 and 50mm lens and then.. i saw the price of that lens 😢
Canon's APSC crop factor is 1.6. So a 50mm would be equivalent to 80, not 75.
And an 85mm becomes 136mm, not 120mm!
I fear you will be disappointed with the future of Canon’s apsc lens lineup, if the past is any kind of indication of the future.
I fear the same! I think Canon market these cameras mainly at those who want more reach and are likely to use a full frame zoom anyway. I hope to at least see a few light weight primes, like the EFS 22 f2 lens.
Thank you, the video I needed to watch.
The big problem with the R7 is the lack of APS-C lenses. We can't even get a decent F4 standard zoom?
Completely agree.
I wonder if the 35mm F/1.8's resolving power is diffraction-limited on a camera with the pixel density of the R7. 32.5MP on APS-C yields a ridiculously-tiny pixel pitch... Would be interesting to compare the 32.5MP images scaled down to the equivalent 20MP of the R6. I am guessing they would appear similarly-sharp (though I could be wrong).
Very weird behaviour of this camera R7 with rf35mm 1.8 hmm 🤔 resolution etc not match or on the other hand maybe shake from ibis or shutter? I’m also not sure but interesting to see this! I had used 35mm rf 1.8 on R6 and it a was ok! But here on R7… 😱
Great video. Thanks for your effort. The question is whether it still makes sense to buy a Canon APS-C camera in 2022. I think it makes sense to either buy the RP for pure portrait photography or spend more money right away and buy the better equipped R6 or R5.
Completely agree! The R7 could be a good option for video if they release the right lenses (new 24mm 1.8 could be good). For portraits however the EOS R/RP are just too good value. Thank you for watching!
@@JamesReader Would love to see you review the 24mm 1.8 with the r7 and full frames!
Thanks, great info.
Thank you for watching Mike!
Also doesn’t the r7 have a 1.6x crop not a 1.5? So 24mm > 39mm and 35mm > 56mm?
You’re right! It is indeed 1.6x crop, not the 1.5 I mentioned. So I guess that makes the 85mm more like 140mm! Crazy.
@@JamesReader 98899plk
Nah for portraits I'd go straight full frame like the R5. For video tho the C70 looks so much better here, especially the skin tones textures and the overall image..
Me too, but it's a big investment for a lot of people! I agree- the C70 is amazing. Thank you for watching.
I’m having a hard time finding a comparison between the Rf 24mm 1.8 vs the 15-35 2.8 on the R7.
Im primarily looking at both these for night club photography - which the 1.8 would be superior in low light… but the 15-35 should have better image quality?
May I get your thoughts?
I actually just tested these two against each other using a few lens charts. The RF 24mm 1.8 is a bit sharper wide open than the 15-35 at 24mm. At 2.8 it’s much sharper. You’ll get a bit more reach with the 15-35, but it’s not the strongest lens at 35mm and the flaws are exaggerated on the R7.
I’ve found the 24mm to be one of the best wide angle lenses in terms of image quality on the R7, I feel Canon intentionally made the centre very strong so it performs well on the R7.
@@JamesReader This is exactly the info I was looking for. Thank you James
Are you still having issues with the canon r7 with 35mm combo ?
This was good watch.
Thanks Roman!
Your pinky would fit the grip quite well if you put your index finger on the shutter. Isn't this how you are supposed to hold the camera or am I doing it wrong?
It’s going to be different for everybody. I still have the R7 now and even with my index in the button my pinky isn’t fully on the grip compared to my other R cameras. Today I’m using the R7 all day only for video, so in that case my finger won’t be hovering over the shutter either, but I can rig it up with a top handle or side grip anyway.
When using full frame lenses, a full frame camera is always preferable. Even the lowly RP will produce better images than the R7 with these lenses. For photography - go with the original R if you can afford it or even with the RP. At this moment Canon simply has no lenses for the crop RF cameras. Then again - if video is the main usage, this camera makes much more sense. But for photos - stay away from it. Especially at this price point.
Completely agree! Thank you for watching.
thank you great video
Thank you!
What country it is?? Beautifulllll 😭❤️
I sold my 35mm because I was having too many focusing issues with the RP and R7. After that, I only opted for the premium L series lenses that are much bigger and have never failed me. I do miss having a small lens. Did you ever have any focusing issues with the 24mm on the R7?
The 24mm was definitely the best focusing lens I tried on the R7 (of the smaller prime)
The Canon RF50mm f1.2 and RF85mm f1.2 are both very expensive "L" series lenses, while the RF35mm f1.8 is a much less expensive lens and definitely not an "L" lens. I don't know why anyone would be surprised at the image quality difference?
Rereading this post it could be misunderstood as a slam against James, which is never my intention. James is a wonderful resource for photography and I have great respect for his knowledge and abilities, as well as his relatability and patience with users at all levels.
Please consider this as you read my original comment above. The RF 35mm f1.8 is just a really poor choice for Canon R crop bodies like the EOS R7 and EOS R10.
Maybe you should reach out to canon so they are aware of the situation and might come up with a solution with a firmware update.
Good review
just ordered the R7 before watching this video. now tell me I am not going to be disappointed. I do essentially still photography
You'll love it! I've used it a lot since this video and the RF 35mm is the only lens where I wasn't too happy with the results. The new 24mm 1.8 is great on it for example.
@@JamesReader Thank you, what a relief ! And great video in a nice area
@@cgiovanni5982 Thank you! Enjoy the R7, let me know how you like it.
I think you'll be happy with it. APS-C sensors have very tight and small photosites. This causes any slight shake to cause motion blur. What I noticed here with examples was more of that phenomenon than actually not "focusing". When shooting hand held at lower shutter speeds, you'll have to be more mindful of camera shake (regardless of IBIS) and possibly use a slightly higher shutter speed than normal to prevent. Good luck!
@@AndrewCCM I'll keep that in mind thank you. still don't have it yet so I ordered it somewhere else and hopefully I should get it before christmas.
Love the r6
Perfect video
Thank you!
Any update so far with the picture quality of 35mm on r7 after a year this video is created?
the 35 is garbage as you can see. Probably you had to use 18-35 from sigma
I can easily tell the lack of detail because of lower bitrate on the R7 some parts are mushy, but at a glance it almost is identical. R6 is better imo. (It could have been a bit out of focused to give the r7 credit)
Just look at her shirt and hair during the video tests*
Please make a comparison r7 vs r6 with telephoto lens. Does crop sensor has more reach?
still RP it's is beautiful detail it's Fullframe it's more advantage than Crop. R7 but nice specs...
beautiful pics though, on both systems, all that matters is the pics
Looked to me like you underexposed and shot with low shutter speeds for a very small pixel size sensor. Many of the focus problems I saw in your examples were typical of shake with APS-C sensors since there pixels are so much smaller and tightly packed.
You could be right Andrew. Thanks for watching!
@AndrewCCM - It's a 35mm (56mm equivalent) lens that has IS, being used with a camera that has IBIS, how is it possible that 1/200 is not completely adequate to get a sharp image with that focal range?
@@nicolaschallenor1120you tell me? Works fine on mine.
r7 + 28-70mm is also good combination. ?
Can you help me choose the quality of the video camera I want to buy
The R7 is a great choice for video. Pair it up with one of the kit lenses to start or look at the upcoming 24mm 1.8 along with the 50mm 1.8 could be a good combo.
@@JamesReader Will you do a review of both the new 24mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8 on these cameras? Thank you
I should have also asked, do you. prefer the 50 1.2 or the 85 1.2 on the R7?
I prefer the 50mm 1.2. Only because I find it an easier focal length to work with on a crop sensor camera. Both are amazing on the R7 though, just personal preference.
@@JamesReader Thank you, James!
Thank you. I haven't had a dslr since my old 550D. I need to take pictures of small objects like rings, bracelets or necklace with & without a model. I already have 50mm 1.8 EF and 18-55 EFS kit lens. I'm realy confused. I will shoot videos but photography will be the main aspects. I will focus on the accessories rather than the model. I will need to buy extra lenses but I need to use my money wisely. Shoul I go with Eos R or RP with better lenses or buy an R6 or R7 and stick to their kit lens for a while alongf with my old EF lenses.
If video is not a priority, then I would go with either the EOS R or RP personally in your situation. Amazing cameras.
Canon R with RF 100mm macro.
All I want…. All I want to see is a video test with the ibis paired with the 35 1.8 IS on the R7…. But I can’t find any RUclipsrs doing it 😩 could you do one more in depth or more tests please? Hell, if you just do an instagram or YT Short testing it out more please!!!
I'll do my best to test with it - is there anything you are concerned about in particular with the combo? I use this lens with R5, R6 and C70 for video all the time and it's excellent. Lots of the B Roll on this channel is shot with that lens.
@@JamesReader so I do documentary style work and I want to essentially get an R7 to replace my c100 mkii when I’m doing handheld shooting and tracking. I want to see how good the ibis and IS are together. Specifically for the R7 and 35mm combo. If you could do both a vertical shooting test and a horizontal one of maybe tracking a subject walking, sitting while you get face detailed shots in 24p and 60p that would be magnificent!
Is there a speed booster u can vet for the canon aps c cameras ? (I have on sony crop bpdies and use canon ff lenses as ff)
so would you say that the r6 performs better in phototherapy and the r7 in video?
Would it be safe to say that if you own an R7 and are using the full frame RF glass, that the L series will perform much better on the crop sensor? I have an R10 and was looking at going to an R7 or R6 Mark II to gain the dual card slots, but trying to justify the price difference in the bodies.
Just go for R6 ii since R7 is basically similar to your R10.
can I use the same rule for cannon R7 with 18-150mm lens? Or May I know the rule of portrait for cannon R7 with AF-18-150mm lens. I don.t have prime lens.
I think that would be around a 28mm - 240mm focal length range in full frame equivalent so you have access to all the great focal lengths for portraits and more.
@@JamesReader Thanks James!
I'm looking to buy the Canon R7. I'm a hybrid shooter, who specifically shoots portraits among other things. I'm looking to go for the Canon 35mm F1.8 & the Canon 85 F2 lenses. would you reccomennd those for this camera? Also this is really informative
They could work! However I would hold out and maybe consider the new RF 24mm 1.8 over the 35mm as it will give you a wider, more versatile frame of view for environmental portraits. Then pair it with either the 50mm 1.8 or the 85mm f2 - whichever focal length you prefer for more classic portrait shots. Hope that helps
@@JamesReader I'll definitely research more on the Canon RF 24mm F1.8 lense. I'm doing a lot of research on looking into good lenses to go in on when I do upgrade to the R7. Thank you for all of the information you have on this and you're reccomendations.
Man, what amazing video! One of the best style of comparison. If you plis, can do the same comparison but with some APSC lenses, like 18-35 1.8 from Sigma, to see if the softness continues. Thanks and keep up with the great work.
Thank you Jordan! I definitely plan to try more APSC lenses on the R7
@@JamesReader Another option if you could. If you use the 0.71 adapter with the full frame lenses, the softness will stay the same? And using the apsc lenses too? 😁 Thanks a lot.
I'm wondering to buy the R7 with the 18-35 f1.8, that's why the questions 😅
I use Canon FF lens 16-35 F2.8 L or 24-70 F2.8L on R7 and the images are beautiful, I also use Sigma 18-35 F1.8 crop lens and the photos are just WOW. Photos from Sigma lens are very sharp and the color is just crazy... Now the Sigma lens will stay on R7 for a long time... :)
@@martintranphotography thank you for your review.
Good video , which is better sony or canon?
For an APSC camera? Definitely Sony due to having way more lens choices. But personally prefer Fujifilm in that format. In general I prefer Canon to Sony mainly because of the ergonomics. Sony has great lens choices in general. Can’t go wrong with either.
Can I use canon Speedlite 470EX-AI with canon R7 ?
If a canon not be able to create sharp images what else will do it’s a jokr
What's the Song around the 3 minute mark? sounds great
It's called New Light by Shoji - ruclips.net/video/ntAaygfsaqY/видео.html
Hi James, I just bought the canon r and wonder if I should return and get the R7? I only shoot photos
Definitely keep the R - better for photos in my opinion! It's a great camera.
@@JamesReader thank you sir!
I sold my eos r and got a c200 but I wanted to get a r7 so a b cam for video and for whenever I shoot pics but I also have a metabones speed booster for the rf mount I was wondering if you think the speed booster would be a good addition to the r7 I only have ef full frame lenses out side of the sigma 18-35mm
I think the R7 would be the perfect B Cam and the speed booster will make it even more versatile. I think you’ll love it!
Still tryna decide what I want would you recommend the r6 over the r7 to go with my c200 I do primarily video but still love taking photos of my family kids and travel
Your math is wrong. R7 is a 1.6 crop sensor faktor, not 1.5.
Thanks for making this video. One thing though: Why is the r7 better for video than stills? Weren’t you using the same lenses? I do recall another reviewer saying that shutter shock is an issue with the r7 ( compared to the r6/5) so I’m wondering if this might be at the heart of your observation. Thanks!
Thank you for watching! It’s not necessarily that the R7 is better for video than stills, it’s just that if your focus is still photography I think your money is better spent on the EOS R or RP. For video though, this is the best bang for buck in Canons line up (other than maybe the R10 but I haven’t tried that yet)
Very interesting info about shutter shock by the way. That very well might have been the issue
@@JamesReader if i may, the real best bang for buck is actually, IMHO of course 🙂 the M6 Mark II, which coupled with EF adapter (and why not, even a speedbooster) features uncropped full sensor 4k video with DPAF; It's the only M camera to do it, and i think it was the first Canon camera ever, Cinema line excluded, to have an uncropped sensor 4k AND the Dual Pixel AF with eye tracking enabled in 4k. I don't think it so inferior (if inferior at all) to the R10 (the former has also a richer mpx sensor) or even to the R7, pixel peeping of course some difference can be found, but reproducing on a screen i'm sure there's no visible difference. And an M6 Mark II cost around 600€ used, which is around 40% less then an R10, and less then half of an R7.
90D or R7? Which one is better in term of photo and video. I m really confuse between the two.
r7 is basically a mirrorless 90d with upgraded specs.
@@TheHDStation So which one will be best?
@@Arfat-Khan r7
R7 is more than enough for its price range.
Are you 100 % sure you weren't out of focus with the R7? It seems to be worse than my GH5
Could be some focus issues with the 35mm. I shot hundreds of images on the day though with similar quality throughout unfortunately. Much better quality from the other lenses.