I absolutely love these reviews and the fact that you provide us with raw files so we could see how the files look before purchasing, I personally am a videographer and wish you could upload some sample videos at different settings and codecs just like you do with the photos
Thanks Jared, these files are precisely what I wanted to see. Love that you supplied them, and love your down-to-earth discussion of them. For me, the R7 ticks all the boxes given what I can currently afford to spend. And yes, I would have liked to get super clean medium format-like 4000 ISO shots on a $1500 aps-c camera - and as long as we’re playing make believe I’d also like a pony. This is good enough, and thanks for being real about that 👍
I like your channel and I see lot of your videos. I am glad you put this review about the R7 and R10 so we "normal people" can see what those models are able to do. What I do not agree with you is about the editing part where you mention about not to use noise reduction softwares. I personally use them (when it is needed) and I am happy about the result. The noise reduction is even present in LR software. If your preference is not to use them because you like photos with grain, I respect your preference, but I do not agree when you say we do not need to run those denoise softwares (PS: I am not working with any of those companies nor advertise them). With your nice presets you apply many changes to those files (color change, exposure, contrast, saturation, vignetting...) which alter the original photo from the camera, so according me it is fine to apply noise reduction too when it is needed. Sorry but this time I disagree with you
Just hit pre-order on an R7 and now catching up with some of the more detailed image reviews. Thanks for your review and it helps confirm the choice to buy one. Really looking forward to getting it now. Jumping from an R to the R7. For my type of interests the extra reach of the crop, frame rate, focus modes and IBIS all outweigh any FF/crop trade-off. It all comes down to what you need the camera to do. We can't all afford the R3.
Downloaded the R7 Files. Thank you very much Jared. I am shocked. I expected much better fotos. I mean, this noise isnt any better as on my 750d with an sigma... And Jared, this grain isnt fine at all.
Id like to remind everyone the R5 and R6 had similar green color tint issues using Adobe Color profile in Lightroom when those cameras were released, only after a year Adobe added the correct camera matching profiles for R5 and R6 which did not have these green casts. I suspect its the same here as the Adobe Color profile is selected on these images.
I will breathe easier when I see an update to the Canon RP. I've said it before, but I'm a strong believer in continuing to make full frame affordable so I hope they won't rely on crop sensors to fill the mid-price range.
@Photo Bunny That would have been cool to see. However, you know why they do it, right? You probably do, but I'll say it anyway. There would be no reason to get an R, R5, or R6 if this new R7 was a full frame. If it was full frame, the R7 would outsell the other R line up, and we know Canon wants to continue selling the others for a while. The new R7 does everything its full frame counterparts do except it is APS-C, and the lesser buffer. I definitely wouldn't buy the others, and I'm saying this as I got an R for a good price last year to make the leap to full frame mirrorless (came from a 90D), but now I feel like I am missing out on the AF tracking modes for things like animals. I've recently gotten hooked on photographing birds and really wish I had the animal eye AF. My favorite is landscape photography, but I really like birding as well. I don't want to downgrade to a crop sensor since I want to commit to full frame now. I might hold out if Canon releases another "entry level" full frame later on. I like the 30MP of the R, but I like the animal AF that starts on the R6, but wish it was more than 20MP. Maybe they're R MkII (or whatever it will be called) will have what the R6 and R5 have, but for the price I paid for the original R. I'll grab that one when it happens. I'll admit though, this R7 is looking so good. Maybe I could get it just for birds and use the RF to EF adapter to use my 100-400 Sigma.
@@P.W.R. The bigger reason than cannibalizing sales of other cameras is that they're just a whole lot cheaper to make. Full Frame sensors require a lot of very expensive silicon to produce and cut. The larger the sensor, the lower the yields on them. (these sizes are just for example) A canon crop sensor is about 1/2 the size of the full frame sensor. Say you can fit 10 FF sensors on a wafer, you can fit 20 crops. Subtract one or two for defects in the wafer itself or in the lithography and now you've got 8FF and 18Crops. Everything else about the cameras are probably similar, but it's those sensor yields that can really drive up the cost of a camera. This new supposedly 100mpx camera they're working on will likely have a nightmarish yield ratio.
Looks pretty good to me and I trust your judgement/comments. Preordered to upgrade from my 90D primarily used for soccer photos. Hopefully I’m not disappointed. Thanks, Fro.
@@jjtomasella I have not experienced any focus issues with mine and I have found that if there was a focus problem, it was my fault. I have used it for thousands of soccer game photos, portraits and landscape.
Use center point only and no stupid teleconverters. I have just as many sharp in focus 90d birds flying TOWARDS the camera in flight as my yawnfest over priced R5. I actually like my higher pixel density 90d bird files > the R5. So, the grass in not always greener simply by blowing a ton of $$$. Obviously the R5 does better for night landscape photography and in some general landscape situations but overall = not a “life changing” camera. If the R7 was out a year ago I woulda been all over it!!!
@@jjtomasella Yes, many people had issues with the focusing. I bought the M6 Mk II and it runs rings around the 90D in terms of burst rate and autofocus performance/AF tracking.
Mr. Jared Polin, I'm in need of one of your autofocus comparisons when the Fujifilm X-H2s come out officially: none has ever done autofocus (evf) recording comparisons in an extensive way as you. Thanks
As a 90D user, this camera (R7) is perfect for me. The only thing that makes me consider saving up for an R6 is the fact that the R7 wont get a battery grip, and from what ive seen, will have poor low light performance.
@@EricRudolph9 Yeah Its a big factor for me. Photography is my full time job (On top of high school) and I shoot a lot of sport and motorsport, so: 1. Changing batteries mid-event isn't great and may cause me to miss some shots 2. Having to carry batteries on me whilst my gear is in the media centre means my movements (In terms of lying down etc) can be restricted, or I get to the position I want slower. 3. I may forget to bring Batteries with me whilst on the other side of the track. 4. I shoot a lot of photos portrait, having no buttons on the bottom right like most battery grips do will mean my wrists get sore etc.
Thank You Jared!! As a 7D Mark II owner looking to upgrade to the R7, these DNG files really put things into perspective. I opened them up and played around with them. I was was quite happy with raw output and results. Definitely pre-ordering my R7 soon!
Thank you for the Raws ... I have a Nikon D7500 that I use for wildlife photos and was about to pre-order an R7 and decided to put that on hold for now. Obviously, the main attraction of the R7 for me is the Auto Focus. On my DSLR the Auto Focus is atrocious and frustrating, to say the least. The higher megapixel of the R7 was also attractive for extra cropping which can be really handy for wildlife photos. My dilemma now that i've seen the Raws from the R7 is that they are visibly noisier than those from my D7500 at the same ISO, I was not expecting that :-(. I assumed some of it was due to the higher resolution so I downsampled the R7's Raw to 20 megapixels which is the D7500 resolution, it is not as bad, but still noisier :-/ . So the extra resolution of the R7 would not be of any use to me if it comes with extra noise. It would still be worth switching to the R7 for the Auto Focus but not if photos have more ISO noise than my DSLR, in which case I would just have to be patient and save until I can get a full frame. Has anybody else compared the R7 raws to their D7500's ? . No I don't think any more than a tiny bit of Noise is fine nowadays, I see it as a defect, unless it is added on purpose :-) even Shutterstock's AI filters reject my photos if they have any noticeable noise.
I had the same noise disappointment as well when I went with Canon, updating from my Nikon D40X. I’m not sure why, but I’m too invested now to turn back.
Jared, do you ever use Warm Cards to set a custom white balance. I think the pale green "fluorescent" card in that set would have really helped with those indoor soccer shots under mixed lighting. I carry a set of Warm Cards always (the small size). They include 3 warming cards, a 2 or 3 cooling cards, that special fluorescent card, and a standard gray card that's pure white on the opposite side. They really come in handy at times. (Even shooting RAW, which I do almost exclusively.)
Thanks for the video! Great to be able to work with real files and see them by myself. I use a 70D and was curious to see how much sensors have progressed in 3 generations of APS-C cameras. No very impressed. I see very little improvement in noise, maybe a little bit more in dynamic range, but nothing game changing. I believe the real selling point for this cameras is AF, there really is a big improvement.
As a 80D user the big selling points for me are the 4K 60 FPS video (since I want to get into video making), the stabilized sensor (great for both photos and videos), the improved megapixel density (more crop allowed if needed) and the joystick they introduced with the 90D.
You couldn't be more wrong. The difference in dynamic range is huge; where the 70D gets ugly pink banding, the 80D does not. The 90D is slightly better, but in practical terms, the same as the 80D (in terms of noise). However, the images are more detailed on the 90D/M6 Mk II than the 70D. I can see what you are saying regarding ISO noise, but you have to shoot in exactly the same conditions to compare cameras. You can get a cleaner shot at ISO 2000 in one scene than you get in another scene at ISO 800. There really was a big leap from the 70D to 80D in overall image quality and there has only been a tiny progression after that. My M6 Mk II is slightly cleaner than the 80D, but remember we are comparing 32.5MP to 24.2MP. Shrink the M6 Mk II files down to 24.2MP and the images become 1/3 cleaner. Autofocus is out of this world different. The 70D is rubbish compared to these mirrorless cameras and light years behind the R7/R10.
I agree, there is nothing wrong with noise and grain. In most cases you will not even see it unless you blow up the image. When noise is reduced the image becomes less sharp and cartoon like.
Jared, I know you said you don't like programs to "smooth out" grain, but "Topaz AI sharpen" made the photo of the chicks way better.........looks very good to my eye....I wish I could post the pic here
Holy sh!t did you try the new PureRaw with R7 support?! It's black magic, even that soccer pic looks fantastic! Kinda flopped on the fisheye picture though but everything else it cranked to 11!
Thank you very much for this video and this content! And I completely approve of your idea about noise in photography, in my opinion in some cases it adds texture and "crunchiness" to the shots. 😊 Saturday will be a Canon Day nearby and I will be able to test the new cameras for a few minutes, but in the meantime, I'm going to play with your RAW files. 😁
Did you get to play with a Canon R7 that Saturday you mentioned? I am curious what you thought of the image quality. I am still very disappointed in the High ISO performance, from what we have seen so far.
I used to be a stickler for noise, and I still try not to go above 3200, but it doesn’t bother me as much. I guess when I was starting out you just hear other photographers saying things like, noise, noise, noise and it gets in your ear. But ultimately, if I capture a nice image and it’s a bit noisy, most of the time nobody will notice but me or another photographer.
I dont know if you will see this jared. I have a question im in a toss up between r10, r50 im looking for an all around camera dont care about videos at all. Primarily outdoors landscapes street and animals. I had an rp and wished it shot faster for birds. The r50 is 799 with lens vs r10 is 1000 for me 200 is a big difference which would you recommend for someone that wants amazing pics and knows how to use manual settings. My thing is the r50 is missing digital stabilization and the focus stacking is that worth saving 200.00 for what im doing or would the stabilization be worth it for animals and hand holding? Thanks
Thinking of getting the R7 as backup to my R6. Curious to see how well it would extend my reach using my RF 70-200mm 2.8 and RF 100-500mm. Any advice would be much appreciated.
thanks for posting the files. I would have to disagree with no need to use ai noise reduction on images. I've shot alot of higher iso bird photos and ran them through topaz denoise and the results are phenomenal. Obviously you can overdo it, but often it allows me to produce 40 x 60 inch prints that look much more pleasing then if I left the very noticeable grain in the image. To each his own I guess.
The RAW files look very promising even on R10. I'm planning to purchase R10 this fall, however, I'm bit skeptical if I should go for it. The R10 body doesn't have the IBIS, however, the kit lens has the IS. Would I be able to get sharp pictures (handheld) when I'm fully zoomed (e.g. 150mm)?
Using correct settings, e.g. an adequate shutter speed, absolutely. I have the M6 Mk II with the same MP and no IBIS and have no issues getting sharp images.
Been shooting with the little RP for the last 2 years. 99% outdoor sports in California sunlight. Really miss my 7dMK2. the RP fps is terrible for sports. May keep it for my indoor portraits and buy the R7 for the fps speed. I appreciate the honest review and being able to edit the DNG files to check the "noise"
I applaud your editing ethics, Jared. A little grain is okay and I always try to represent what I saw when taking the image, rather than manipulating it...
I was just able to take some time away from life to edit one photo; the beach volleyball photo... and....yeah it's pretty fantastic. Simple edits and it's a damn good shot. I barely see any grain.
I downloaded the .dngs and played. I like the R7...I may get one to back up my two R6s. As for the dreaded 'noise' when at a high ISO. I shoot a lot of weddings. When I'm in some churches, or trying to catch someone that's lit with the screen of their iPhone, the light can be real low. I have shot images with an ISO of 10,000. Even if I nailed the exposure, if skin is predominantly filling the frame, I need some of that noise reduction to bring the skin back to somewhat normal. If it smooths the skin, so be it. It's better than 'too much pepper'.
Hi Jared! I love your reviews and the advice you give along the way. It would be great if you make instruction videos at some point. Thanks for your videos!
Thanks for providing the raw files. I currently use the M6MKII for wildlife. I already know how to handle that sensor in high ISO situations and I don’t expect a great change in this camera.
When you say "handle that sensor", do you mean when shooting, or in post? I overexpose my images, keeping an eye on the histogram not to blow out the highlights. This gives cleaner files than correctly exposing (according to the meter) or underexposing (a disaster). I also always have highlight tone priority (enhanced) turned on. I like the M6 Mk II but hate its poor ISO performance compared to FF.
@@cooloox Both really. I try to avoid high ISO situations and expose to the right like you do to reduce noise. However, since a lot of wildlife is early or late in the day and requires a high shutter speed, and my lens is 6.3 at 600mm, sometimes I am “forced” into less than optimal conditions. In those case I use an AI denoise program to clean up the image. I don’t remove all the noise, just enough that it is no longer distracting. I haven’t seen a FF with this pixel density. If this was a full size sensor it would be 84mp. That sensor would likely be noisy too.
I really want to see how it compares noise wise at higher ISOs to other brands , both crop and full frame . I'm still reasonably happy with my 7Dii but if this gives me a significant improvement in image quality at higher iso , I might be interested.
Thanks for the files, will have a play around. As far as noise reduction software, yeah a lot of people overdo it. Use the better software well, and it take take your shots from barely passable to something you can deliver to a client - and no you cant always get closer, or improve the light or slow down the shutter speed.... used well its just another tool in the bag.
So I recently got the m50 mark i …I know it’s older but got it for a song new in the box. How does something like that stack up against an R6 or R7. I’m a newb but gotta start somewhere
Great little camera that is unlikely to hold your photography back for many years to come. Uses the same sensor as the 80D, which is suspected to be the sensor that is in the new R10. People who are into cameras want the newest thing either because they are a pro and need it it or, more often, they are not a pro and just want the newest toy with all the bells and whistles.
The M50 is a great little camera, it's not for action shots but for a nice walk around camera that's small and lightweight paired with the 22mm F2 pancake lens. I have one and sometimes I take it instead of My R5, R6 or RP with RF L glass.
Maybe it's just me, but I noticed that for some time now your studio white balance is slightly off towards yellow tones, it's visible mainly on a skin tone. In the past it was OK. I remember there was similar issue when you switched to R5's but then you fixed it.
@@truthseeker6804 are you kidding? He compares everything to full frame and puts it down, even medium format!. Ask any micro 4/3 user. Change your name if you believe otherwise.
I understand where you are coming from, but.. as a owner of EFS lenses, what good would that do? For you, it's actually better if you see what better glass can do with the sensor. You're ultimately going to be held down by the quality of the lenses that you have. Remember that copies can vary. Even if you see a great EFS image from him you're shooting technique or your lens copy is ultimately going to determine what your images are going to look like. I've always used the best case scenario and gone down from there. That way you know exactly what the sensor and lens combo is capable of. It's better to test against. Cheers. BONUS - this wonderful site has all of the information you need including image quality tests : The-digital-picture dot com. This guy has reviewed everything Canon for like the last 20 years or so.. click on image review, and then switch the lens to whichever models you have. You could check out expended sharpness and such from the center mid-frame and edges. Read the reviews. I have used this for every single lens that I have bought over the last 10 years. Enjoy!
Definitely agree with you. I’m not a fan of conventional depositing as it’s mostly just blurring the image. But with support of machine learning it just applys the denoising where it needs to be and leaves the important data intact
I have had some images come out plasticky in Topaz, some come out with some noise still in them, some come out better than I could have done in LR/PS. Its def worth the price of admission, but I think the sharpening tool has been seriously nerfed after a certain point, no doubt to convince users they also need sharpen AI.
I care more about the sharpness than the noise, but I don't mind noise taken out especially if the subject is wildlife. I love pixel peeping and seeing crisp clean feathers on a Blue Jay as an example is really neat.
I just downloded you dng's. Thanks for shareing. I have loaded them into C1. The ISO 4000 files are pretty noisy. It may be an APS-C issue, as I never used an APS-C sensor and I am used to better ISO performance on my VF bodys. Tried to use DXO PURERAW2, but it didn't recognise your dng's. Contrary to your opinion, I have successfully used pureraw2 on .arw files up to ISO 52000 in combination with C1.
I just preorder the R7 , and now I have a doubt / question : Is the autofocus on R7 more or less the same than R6 , or it is in fact more advanced ? Thanks !!
It’s more advanced- it actually inherits the system from the newer R3 (this can track vehicles as well as human and animal eye detection). That’s where the real value of the R7 lies - getting that pro focusing at this price is quite remarkable.
I wonder: does anybody know if the fullframe RF lenses are sharp enough to see the difference between the R7 and R10. In the Eos 90d days there were no lenses that were sharp enough. Because of the crop you only use the middle of the lenses, so they have to be a lot sharper then for same resolution with full frame.
I’m really debating whether I should upgrade from an R to either an R6 or R7. I adapt all my glass so everything is EF FF (aside from a RF35mm 1.8 and RF50 1.8). Any thoughts on what would be the better upgrade? Is the R6 still the better option for than the R7 given the price differences?
As you have a lot of EF lenses, R6 is also full frame makes sense, while R7 is a crop sensor camera. R6 would give better low light files. R7 would give the lenses longer reach with 1.6x factor to any lens on it that was EF. Crop sensor cameras like R7 are designed for EF-S lenses which are native, but you can put on EF (full frame) lenses also.
@@truthseeker6804 yeah, I’ve had my EOS R for about 2 years now and am missing the advanced autofocus in the newer cameras. That’s what I’m looking forward to most tbh. All my lenses otherwise have IS so the IBIS isn’t as necessary to me; but the autofocus upgrade is what I’d be looking for to upgrade.
Thanks for the video and the raw files. I am really curious to see how these files compare to previous Canon APS-C images. I kind of wish you didn’t use the word grain when talking about digital files, but we all get the idea. ✌️😁
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
I absolutely love these reviews and the fact that you provide us with raw files so we could see how the files look before purchasing, I personally am a videographer and wish you could upload some sample videos at different settings and codecs just like you do with the photos
Thanks Jared, these files are precisely what I wanted to see. Love that you supplied them, and love your down-to-earth discussion of them. For me, the R7 ticks all the boxes given what I can currently afford to spend. And yes, I would have liked to get super clean medium format-like 4000 ISO shots on a $1500 aps-c camera - and as long as we’re playing make believe I’d also like a pony. This is good enough, and thanks for being real about that 👍
I like your channel and I see lot of your videos. I am glad you put this review about the R7 and R10 so we "normal people" can see what those models are able to do. What I do not agree with you is about the editing part where you mention about not to use noise reduction softwares. I personally use them (when it is needed) and I am happy about the result. The noise reduction is even present in LR software. If your preference is not to use them because you like photos with grain, I respect your preference, but I do not agree when you say we do not need to run those denoise softwares (PS: I am not working with any of those companies nor advertise them). With your nice presets you apply many changes to those files (color change, exposure, contrast, saturation, vignetting...) which alter the original photo from the camera, so according me it is fine to apply noise reduction too when it is needed. Sorry but this time I disagree with you
Just hit pre-order on an R7 and now catching up with some of the more detailed image reviews. Thanks for your review and it helps confirm the choice to buy one. Really looking forward to getting it now. Jumping from an R to the R7. For my type of interests the extra reach of the crop, frame rate, focus modes and IBIS all outweigh any FF/crop trade-off. It all comes down to what you need the camera to do. We can't all afford the R3.
Are you able to test the low light on the R7/R10 for photos and videos?
Downloaded the R7 Files. Thank you very much Jared. I am shocked. I expected much better fotos. I mean, this noise isnt any better as on my 750d with an sigma... And Jared, this grain isnt fine at all.
Id like to remind everyone the R5 and R6 had similar green color tint issues using Adobe Color profile in Lightroom when those cameras were released, only after a year Adobe added the correct camera matching profiles for R5 and R6 which did not have these green casts. I suspect its the same here as the Adobe Color profile is selected on these images.
This is a great video. I’m new to your channel but I’m now three or so videos in and I’m impressed
I will breathe easier when I see an update to the Canon RP. I've said it before, but I'm a strong believer in continuing to make full frame affordable so I hope they won't rely on crop sensors to fill the mid-price range.
Would be nice for sure
@Photo Bunny
That would have been cool to see. However, you know why they do it, right? You probably do, but I'll say it anyway. There would be no reason to get an R, R5, or R6 if this new R7 was a full frame. If it was full frame, the R7 would outsell the other R line up, and we know Canon wants to continue selling the others for a while. The new R7 does everything its full frame counterparts do except it is APS-C, and the lesser buffer. I definitely wouldn't buy the others, and I'm saying this as I got an R for a good price last year to make the leap to full frame mirrorless (came from a 90D), but now I feel like I am missing out on the AF tracking modes for things like animals. I've recently gotten hooked on photographing birds and really wish I had the animal eye AF. My favorite is landscape photography, but I really like birding as well. I don't want to downgrade to a crop sensor since I want to commit to full frame now.
I might hold out if Canon releases another "entry level" full frame later on. I like the 30MP of the R, but I like the animal AF that starts on the R6, but wish it was more than 20MP. Maybe they're R MkII (or whatever it will be called) will have what the R6 and R5 have, but for the price I paid for the original R. I'll grab that one when it happens. I'll admit though, this R7 is looking so good. Maybe I could get it just for birds and use the RF to EF adapter to use my 100-400 Sigma.
@@P.W.R. The bigger reason than cannibalizing sales of other cameras is that they're just a whole lot cheaper to make. Full Frame sensors require a lot of very expensive silicon to produce and cut. The larger the sensor, the lower the yields on them. (these sizes are just for example) A canon crop sensor is about 1/2 the size of the full frame sensor. Say you can fit 10 FF sensors on a wafer, you can fit 20 crops. Subtract one or two for defects in the wafer itself or in the lithography and now you've got 8FF and 18Crops.
Everything else about the cameras are probably similar, but it's those sensor yields that can really drive up the cost of a camera. This new supposedly 100mpx camera they're working on will likely have a nightmarish yield ratio.
I liked the way you showed us the raw files and then your edits.
Great info. I would love to see a comparison with the r7 / r10 vs Sony a6600 showdown
Awesome! Very much appreciated! Good luck Jared!
At 3:43 I see a fellow RUclipsr (from "Canadia") on the side of the Pool! Very cool shot! Thanks for the photos and the video! Be well!
Wow, that bird picture at 8:00, it's just beautiful with fantastic colours. This is gonna be my next wallpaper.
I think the files are fine with good sharpness and colour 👌🏼
Your reviews are the best. 👍🏻👍🏻
Looks pretty good to me and I trust your judgement/comments. Preordered to upgrade from my 90D primarily used for soccer photos. Hopefully I’m not disappointed. Thanks, Fro.
I am trying to decide. I have the 90d as well and have had so many focus issues with it. Was debating to jump to the r6 or r7.
@@jjtomasella I have not experienced any focus issues with mine and I have found that if there was a focus problem, it was my fault. I have used it for thousands of soccer game photos, portraits and landscape.
Use center point only and no stupid teleconverters. I have just as many sharp in focus 90d birds flying TOWARDS the camera in flight as my yawnfest over priced R5. I actually like my higher pixel density 90d bird files > the R5. So, the grass in not always greener simply by blowing a ton of $$$.
Obviously the R5 does better for night landscape photography and in some general landscape situations but overall = not a “life changing” camera.
If the R7 was out a year ago I woulda been all over it!!!
@@jjtomasella Yes, many people had issues with the focusing. I bought the M6 Mk II and it runs rings around the 90D in terms of burst rate and autofocus performance/AF tracking.
Mr. Jared Polin,
I'm in need of one of your autofocus comparisons when the Fujifilm X-H2s come out officially: none has ever done autofocus (evf) recording comparisons in an extensive way as you.
Thanks
i need to try out the body myself... shooting at high iso was not neeeded
No Fujifilm XH2s?
Now that we can open the cr3 files in Lightroom does it make any difference between the dng files ? I'd guess no but I gotta ask lol.
As a 90D user, this camera (R7) is perfect for me. The only thing that makes me consider saving up for an R6 is the fact that the R7 wont get a battery grip, and from what ive seen, will have poor low light performance.
what No Grip?! (havent watched video yet...)
@@EricRudolph9 Yeah Its a big factor for me. Photography is my full time job (On top of high school) and I shoot a lot of sport and motorsport, so:
1. Changing batteries mid-event isn't great and may cause me to miss some shots
2. Having to carry batteries on me whilst my gear is in the media centre means my movements (In terms of lying down etc) can be restricted, or I get to the position I want slower.
3. I may forget to bring Batteries with me whilst on the other side of the track.
4. I shoot a lot of photos portrait, having no buttons on the bottom right like most battery grips do will mean my wrists get sore etc.
Are you going to review the new Fujifilm gear that was just released?
And what about autofocus in video? Does it have the same features And Speed as When shooting?
Thank You Jared!! As a 7D Mark II owner looking to upgrade to the R7, these DNG files really put things into perspective. I opened them up and played around with them. I was was quite happy with raw output and results. Definitely pre-ordering my R7 soon!
I’m thinking of buying a 7d mkii as a beginner in sports photography, do you have any recommendations?
Thank you for the Raws ... I have a Nikon D7500 that I use for wildlife photos and was about to pre-order an R7 and decided to put that on hold for now.
Obviously, the main attraction of the R7 for me is the Auto Focus. On my DSLR the Auto Focus is atrocious and frustrating, to say the least. The higher megapixel of the R7 was also attractive for extra cropping which can be really handy for wildlife photos.
My dilemma now that i've seen the Raws from the R7 is that they are visibly noisier than those from my D7500 at the same ISO, I was not expecting that :-(. I assumed some of it was due to the higher resolution so I downsampled the R7's Raw to 20 megapixels which is the D7500 resolution, it is not as bad, but still noisier :-/ .
So the extra resolution of the R7 would not be of any use to me if it comes with extra noise. It would still be worth switching to the R7 for the Auto Focus but not if photos have more ISO noise than my DSLR, in which case I would just have to be patient and save until I can get a full frame.
Has anybody else compared the R7 raws to their D7500's ? . No I don't think any more than a tiny bit of Noise is fine nowadays, I see it as a defect, unless it is added on purpose :-) even Shutterstock's AI filters reject my photos if they have any noticeable noise.
I had the same noise disappointment as well when I went with Canon, updating from my Nikon D40X. I’m not sure why, but I’m too invested now to turn back.
Jared, do you ever use Warm Cards to set a custom white balance. I think the pale green "fluorescent" card in that set would have really helped with those indoor soccer shots under mixed lighting. I carry a set of Warm Cards always (the small size). They include 3 warming cards, a 2 or 3 cooling cards, that special fluorescent card, and a standard gray card that's pure white on the opposite side. They really come in handy at times. (Even shooting RAW, which I do almost exclusively.)
I'm definitely getting the canon R7 especially for video C log 3 ☺️🔥🔥
Do the R10 or R7 have zebras?
Would love to see R7 vs R6
Thanks for the video! Great to be able to work with real files and see them by myself. I use a 70D and was curious to see how much sensors have progressed in 3 generations of APS-C cameras. No very impressed. I see very little improvement in noise, maybe a little bit more in dynamic range, but nothing game changing. I believe the real selling point for this cameras is AF, there really is a big improvement.
As a 80D user the big selling points for me are the 4K 60 FPS video (since I want to get into video making), the stabilized sensor (great for both photos and videos), the improved megapixel density (more crop allowed if needed) and the joystick they introduced with the 90D.
You couldn't be more wrong. The difference in dynamic range is huge; where the 70D gets ugly pink banding, the 80D does not. The 90D is slightly better, but in practical terms, the same as the 80D (in terms of noise). However, the images are more detailed on the 90D/M6 Mk II than the 70D. I can see what you are saying regarding ISO noise, but you have to shoot in exactly the same conditions to compare cameras. You can get a cleaner shot at ISO 2000 in one scene than you get in another scene at ISO 800. There really was a big leap from the 70D to 80D in overall image quality and there has only been a tiny progression after that. My M6 Mk II is slightly cleaner than the 80D, but remember we are comparing 32.5MP to 24.2MP. Shrink the M6 Mk II files down to 24.2MP and the images become 1/3 cleaner. Autofocus is out of this world different. The 70D is rubbish compared to these mirrorless cameras and light years behind the R7/R10.
Would like to see Fujifilm XH2s vs Canon’s
I agree, there is nothing wrong with noise and grain. In most cases you will not even see it unless you blow up the image. When noise is reduced the image becomes less sharp and cartoon like.
It would be nice to see some Canon R7 400mm sample images from the Rf 100-400mm f/5.6-8 at Iso 100 equivalent exposures.
Jared, I know you said you don't like programs to "smooth out" grain, but "Topaz AI sharpen" made the photo of the chicks way better.........looks very good to my eye....I wish I could post the pic here
I’m confused. EOS R7 or EOS R for portrait and travel shoots..???
Jared you are an great Camera men expert 😊 Thanks
Jared, Thanks for the review and download. FIles looked great. I will be getting the R7. Just wish they had a battery grip.
I’m 99% sure Canon will, but knowing them it will probably take forever
Great review Jared
Holy sh!t did you try the new PureRaw with R7 support?! It's black magic, even that soccer pic looks fantastic! Kinda flopped on the fisheye picture though but everything else it cranked to 11!
AGREED!!!
Thank you very much for this video and this content!
And I completely approve of your idea about noise in photography, in my opinion in some cases it adds texture and "crunchiness" to the shots. 😊
Saturday will be a Canon Day nearby and I will be able to test the new cameras for a few minutes, but in the meantime, I'm going to play with your RAW files. 😁
Did you get to play with a Canon R7 that Saturday you mentioned? I am curious what you thought of the image quality. I am still very disappointed in the High ISO performance, from what we have seen so far.
@@cooloox no, the R7 could be seen and touched but not used, because it had not yet been released on the market
@@cooloox in the end I took some shots with the eos R but only in JPEG, then I couldn't see the RAW files .. 🙄
Stange that you are okay with editing the colours a lot but raising the shadows is a big no-no.
I noticed the Fro was boomafying a lot of the images, skittles, I'm shocked😲Amazing you were shooting the Gator on leg day 🐊😂
All these edited photos dont look like they did in real life especially black n white obviously, so why does lifting the shadows make a difference?
Your reviews are the best 👌 was set on upgrading to the full frame R from an SL3 but now I’m torn & thinking of the R7..
Same. I'm looking at either the R7 or R10 when I'm ready to upgrade from my Rebel T6
Buy the r6. Full frame is so much better.
from apsc you upgrade to full frame not to another apsc.
The R7 will be a good choice for you. R6 is 24 megapixel while R7 is 33. Also you can use RF lenses
@@Yupthereitism thats the dream but it’s just a hobby for me and I’d like to invest into a new lens as well so I can’t justify the R6 haha
Thank you Jared! For me looks good enough for a content creator like myself. I already pre-ordered canon R7. I am upgrading from my little Canon M50.
I definitely do need those FroPacks... But for Affinity 😅😔
quick question.. if u are photo oriented .. would you choose EOS R or R7?
Awesome video!!! Love the presets!
Time for a camera shootout between this and the r6 and maybe an older 7d mark ii and 90D.
I used to be a stickler for noise, and I still try not to go above 3200, but it doesn’t bother me as much. I guess when I was starting out you just hear other photographers saying things like, noise, noise, noise and it gets in your ear.
But ultimately, if I capture a nice image and it’s a bit noisy, most of the time nobody will notice but me or another photographer.
exactly
I notice tint is in Lightroom (eos R looks a but yellowish there) but looks a bit different on other software like Luminar.
Do a comparisons against the new Fuji XH2S
Bang on about the noise reduction Jared! It's a waste. Grain doesn't ruin a great photo. Also, nice shots.
Grain adds a bit of character imo
Do you think Canon will remove the R6 recording limit with future firmware updates?
Thanks Jared, very useful files. I am after a crop sensor action camera, so will be good to look at the files.
I dont know if you will see this jared. I have a question im in a toss up between r10, r50 im looking for an all around camera dont care about videos at all. Primarily outdoors landscapes street and animals. I had an rp and wished it shot faster for birds. The r50 is 799 with lens vs r10 is 1000 for me 200 is a big difference which would you recommend for someone that wants amazing pics and knows how to use manual settings. My thing is the r50 is missing digital stabilization and the focus stacking is that worth saving 200.00 for what im doing or would the stabilization be worth it for animals and hand holding? Thanks
Just got my R7 the other day and do not have Lightroom for opening RAW files. Is there any free software from Canon or third party I can use? Thanks!
Hi Jared...how would you the R7 to the RP
hi Jared, is it possibile to have the original RAW? I would like to test with Affinity Photo
Thanks for the RAW samples, I have an R7 on pre-order it still looks like a worthy successor to 7D series.
Oh cool...I preordered the R7 and have the RF 100-400!
Same!
Thinking of getting the R7 as backup to my R6. Curious to see how well it would extend my reach using my RF 70-200mm 2.8 and RF 100-500mm. Any advice would be much appreciated.
thanks for posting the files. I would have to disagree with no need to use ai noise reduction on images. I've shot alot of higher iso bird photos and ran them through topaz denoise and the results are phenomenal. Obviously you can overdo it, but often it allows me to produce 40 x 60 inch prints that look much more pleasing then if I left the very noticeable grain in the image. To each his own I guess.
Agree 100%. Topaz has literally changed the way I shoot now.
The RAW files look very promising even on R10. I'm planning to purchase R10 this fall, however, I'm bit skeptical if I should go for it. The R10 body doesn't have the IBIS, however, the kit lens has the IS. Would I be able to get sharp pictures (handheld) when I'm fully zoomed (e.g. 150mm)?
Depends on on how many stops of Image stabilisation the lens has and also the shutter speed and whether the subject is static or moving.
Using correct settings, e.g. an adequate shutter speed, absolutely. I have the M6 Mk II with the same MP and no IBIS and have no issues getting sharp images.
@@cooloox Thanks
Raw files u gave are very helpful
I don’t even own a camera and I enjoy the videos. Getting one soon though.
The processing on these are just absolutely wild.
Been shooting with the little RP for the last 2 years. 99% outdoor sports in California sunlight.
Really miss my 7dMK2. the RP fps is terrible for sports. May keep it for my indoor portraits and buy the R7 for the fps speed.
I appreciate the honest review and being able to edit the DNG files to check the "noise"
I applaud your editing ethics, Jared. A little grain is okay and I always try to represent what I saw when taking the image, rather than manipulating it...
I was just able to take some time away from life to edit one photo; the beach volleyball photo... and....yeah it's pretty fantastic. Simple edits and it's a damn good shot. I barely see any grain.
The noise is a result of slashing APS-C with 32MPix, same problem as with 90D compared to 80D. 20-24MPix for APS-C seem like a sweet spot.
So, after the apsc crop of you record 4k/6p, you have another crop? Can someone please give me an example, if I use a 24mm, what do I get? Thanks!
tnx I just downloaded and will need to study them further
Are you goind to review the new Fuji Xh2s ?
I downloaded the .dngs and played. I like the R7...I may get one to back up my two R6s. As for the dreaded 'noise' when at a high ISO. I shoot a lot of weddings. When I'm in some churches, or trying to catch someone that's lit with the screen of their iPhone, the light can be real low. I have shot images with an ISO of 10,000. Even if I nailed the exposure, if skin is predominantly filling the frame, I need some of that noise reduction to bring the skin back to somewhat normal. If it smooths the skin, so be it. It's better than 'too much pepper'.
You’re awesome 🙏🏼 great video!
Hi Jared! I love your reviews and the advice you give along the way. It would be great if you make instruction videos at some point. Thanks for your videos!
I do
Thanks for providing the raw files. I currently use the M6MKII for wildlife. I already know how to handle that sensor in high ISO situations and I don’t expect a great change in this camera.
When you say "handle that sensor", do you mean when shooting, or in post? I overexpose my images, keeping an eye on the histogram not to blow out the highlights. This gives cleaner files than correctly exposing (according to the meter) or underexposing (a disaster). I also always have highlight tone priority (enhanced) turned on. I like the M6 Mk II but hate its poor ISO performance compared to FF.
@@cooloox Both really. I try to avoid high ISO situations and expose to the right like you do to reduce noise. However, since a lot of wildlife is early or late in the day and requires a high shutter speed, and my lens is 6.3 at 600mm, sometimes I am “forced” into less than optimal conditions. In those case I use an AI denoise program to clean up the image. I don’t remove all the noise, just enough that it is no longer distracting.
I haven’t seen a FF with this pixel density. If this was a full size sensor it would be 84mp. That sensor would likely be noisy too.
In my analog beginning I also choose sometimes 1600iso Filmrolls to add some grain.
.....Greetz from 🇩🇪
I really want to see how it compares noise wise at higher ISOs to other brands , both crop and full frame . I'm still reasonably happy with my 7Dii but if this gives me a significant improvement in image quality at higher iso , I might be interested.
I’m thinking about buying a 7dii, any tips for me?
Thanks for the files, will have a play around.
As far as noise reduction software, yeah a lot of people overdo it.
Use the better software well, and it take take your shots from barely passable to something you can deliver to a client - and no you cant always get closer, or improve the light or slow down the shutter speed.... used well its just another tool in the bag.
So I recently got the m50 mark i …I know it’s older but got it for a song new in the box. How does something like that stack up against an R6 or R7. I’m a newb but gotta start somewhere
Great little camera that is unlikely to hold your photography back for many years to come. Uses the same sensor as the 80D, which is suspected to be the sensor that is in the new R10. People who are into cameras want the newest thing either because they are a pro and need it it or, more often, they are not a pro and just want the newest toy with all the bells and whistles.
The M50 is a great little camera, it's not for action shots but for a nice walk around camera that's small and lightweight paired with the 22mm F2 pancake lens. I have one and sometimes I take it instead of My R5, R6 or RP with RF L glass.
Maybe it's just me, but I noticed that for some time now your studio white balance is slightly off towards yellow tones, it's visible mainly on a skin tone.
In the past it was OK. I remember there was similar issue when you switched to R5's but then you fixed it.
Great stuff👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼👌🏼
Hi Jared I have a question. If you were having a limited budget which camera would you buy between Canon R7 and Fuji xh2s?
r6 and a7iv are better and in the price of the xh2s. r7 has no real competitor.
It's never a Jared Polin video unless he jumps in here real quick 🤣
Do CROP Sensors SUCK?! - Only if you're Tony Northrup - Such a camera snob.
never has he said crop sensor sucks
@@truthseeker6804 Not in those words but he is always saying APS-C isn't "Professional" which is rubbish.
@@acmdv never have i heard him say that
@@truthseeker6804 are you kidding? He compares everything to full frame and puts it down, even medium format!. Ask any micro 4/3 user. Change your name if you believe otherwise.
@@Greggie_D no kidding, never have i heard him say apsc sucks or isnt professional. can you share just one video??
I’ve been adding grain in post production to my Sony images for a while. Coming from film it feels more natural looking to me
also the way to go before printing.. adding grain when there is too less ;))
Do you know if the R10 has the same focus system as the R7?
Yes same.
@@froknowsphoto For sports use which one would be better? R10 or a 6d mark II? I thought about an R7 but it's out of my budget.
Hey Jared, can you also please share the CR3 files from R7?
Retest the r7 and r10 with EF-S lens. Please
I understand where you are coming from, but.. as a owner of EFS lenses, what good would that do?
For you, it's actually better if you see what better glass can do with the sensor. You're ultimately going to be held down by the quality of the lenses that you have. Remember that copies can vary. Even if you see a great EFS image from him you're shooting technique or your lens copy is ultimately going to determine what your images are going to look like.
I've always used the best case scenario and gone down from there. That way you know exactly what the sensor and lens combo is capable of. It's better to test against. Cheers.
BONUS - this wonderful site has all of the information you need including image quality tests : The-digital-picture dot com. This guy has reviewed everything Canon for like the last 20 years or so.. click on image review, and then switch the lens to whichever models you have. You could check out expended sharpness and such from the center mid-frame and edges. Read the reviews. I have used this for every single lens that I have bought over the last 10 years.
Enjoy!
R7 with EF-S lens will give you nothing. They're just too soft.
topaz does such a good job at de noise and keeps detail rather than that plastic fake way but each to there own on what they like
Definitely agree with you. I’m not a fan of conventional depositing as it’s mostly just blurring the image. But with support of machine learning it just applys the denoising where it needs to be and leaves the important data intact
I have had some images come out plasticky in Topaz, some come out with some noise still in them, some come out better than I could have done in LR/PS. Its def worth the price of admission, but I think the sharpening tool has been seriously nerfed after a certain point, no doubt to convince users they also need sharpen AI.
I care more about the sharpness than the noise, but I don't mind noise taken out especially if the subject is wildlife. I love pixel peeping and seeing crisp clean feathers on a Blue Jay as an example is really neat.
Hi Jared, Wich software did you use to convert the CR3 files to DNG files.
Nice thumbnail!
Skittles is my favorite preset ever
I just downloded you dng's. Thanks for shareing. I have loaded them into C1. The ISO 4000 files are pretty noisy. It may be an APS-C issue, as I never used an APS-C sensor and I am used to better ISO performance on my VF bodys. Tried to use DXO PURERAW2, but it didn't recognise your dng's. Contrary to your opinion, I have successfully used pureraw2 on .arw files up to ISO 52000 in combination with C1.
I just preorder the R7 , and now I have a doubt / question : Is the autofocus on R7 more or less the same than R6 , or it is in fact more advanced ? Thanks !!
It’s more advanced- it actually inherits the system from the newer R3 (this can track vehicles as well as human and animal eye detection). That’s where the real value of the R7 lies - getting that pro focusing at this price is quite remarkable.
I wonder: does anybody know if the fullframe RF lenses are sharp enough to see the difference between the R7 and R10. In the Eos 90d days there were no lenses that were sharp enough. Because of the crop you only use the middle of the lenses, so they have to be a lot sharper then for same resolution with full frame.
I’m really debating whether I should upgrade from an R to either an R6 or R7. I adapt all my glass so everything is EF FF (aside from a RF35mm 1.8 and RF50 1.8). Any thoughts on what would be the better upgrade? Is the R6 still the better option for than the R7 given the price differences?
R6 all day. The r7 has crummy dynamic range and really bad noise in the shadows
As you have a lot of EF lenses, R6 is also full frame makes sense, while R7 is a crop sensor camera. R6 would give better low light files. R7 would give the lenses longer reach with 1.6x factor to any lens on it that was EF. Crop sensor cameras like R7 are designed for EF-S lenses which are native, but you can put on EF (full frame) lenses also.
you should make good use of your eos r. you dont need anything else now. you have GAS (Gear acquisition syndrome)
@@truthseeker6804 yeah, I’ve had my EOS R for about 2 years now and am missing the advanced autofocus in the newer cameras. That’s what I’m looking forward to most tbh. All my lenses otherwise have IS so the IBIS isn’t as necessary to me; but the autofocus upgrade is what I’d be looking for to upgrade.
Thanks for the video and the raw files. I am really curious to see how these files compare to previous Canon APS-C images. I kind of wish you didn’t use the word grain when talking about digital files, but we all get the idea. ✌️😁
The images look at least as grainy as the images from my M6 Mk II. It is basically a tweaked version of that sensor, so I guess it makes sense.