Canon EOS R7 pre-sales discussion, hypothesizing, and prognosticating

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19383814
Here’s an excellent article on C-RAW from TDP: https://www.the-digital-picture.com …AW-Image-File-Format.aspx

Thanks Levina!

EDIT: That’s a pretty compelling picture. Sounds like there really is no appreciable downside.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19382876
Hi Hammer. Yes there is!

I was just reading TDP review and I quote:

Hmmm, I wonder if that USB3 port is actually USB3 speed. On the 7D2, the USB3 port operates at about 9MB/s, IIRC, but the USB3 port on the R5 can actually deliver at least 130MB/s.

For those who use cameras tethered to computers, that port speed can be very useful.

hammer418 wrote in post #19382883
So many new things to learn about.....I'd better sharpen my thinking cap !
I feel like a child on Christmas Eve, overflowing with anticipation.

I don't even know much of what my R5 does, and I've had it for 19 months already.

Who cares about the look? The 7D2 was a fantastic camera with some of Canon's best specs at the time, and the people who have waited years for a 7D3 have every right to be disappointed when the replacement isn't better in every way.

Weatherproofing - sounds like advantage 7D2
Flash - advantage 7D2
Ergonomics: advantage 7D2 (could take a grip, if nothing else)
IQ - not really known yet
AF - advantage R7
Burst - advantage R7
Controls - not really known yet

I will probably get an R7 but I'd be happier with a $1900 R7 that does better on the list above.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19382907
Today when the buffer is full, the bursts will stop temporarily until the buffer will allow more images. So instead of clack-clack-clack-clack-clack, you would get clack-<wait for a bit>-clack-clack-<wait for a bit>-clack, if that make sense.

How slow, though? Much slower than the file sizes and camera-to-card write speeds allow? With an extra hiccup during the transition?

grzegorz9992 wrote in post #19382939
in fact, you can assume in the blind that there is already a significant drop in noise after changing from 32 to 24

The 90D has less noise than the 80D. What sensors do you have in mind?

John Sheehy wrote in post #19383886
How slow, though? Much slower than the file sizes and camera-to-card write speeds allow? With an extra hiccup during the transition?

Yes

Immaculens wrote in post #19383818
Yes, but I see an interesting corelation to the original 7D release. Nice body but we had to wait a couple yrs for the robust 7D2 and I feel the R7mkII will be a real winner as I gaze into my crystal ball...

Be interesting to see if Canon does anything with R4, R8, and R9...

We had to wait FIVE years for the 7D2...

Immaculens wrote in post #19383158
Ah so the actual exposure is shown in the evf - so if its a little under or over-exposed - you can readily see it and adjust, yes?

I presume EC is the quicker adjustment option vs changing iso.

Yes; the EVF shows the actual exposure ( simulation) directly from the sensor. Either one is pretty simple and fast on these bodies; I tend to use EC with the RF lens because the dial on the lens is most convenient, but with the EF lenses it’s the top thumb dial.

Snydremark wrote in post #19383912
Yes; the EVF shows the actual exposure ( simulation) directly from the sensor. Either one is pretty simple and fast on these bodies; I tend to use EC with the RF lens because the dial on the lens is most convenient, but with the EF lenses it’s the top thumb dial.

It cannot be the actual, it is a simulation (like you call out in parentheses), basically by raising or lowering the brightness of the EVF to close to what the light meter is indicating for the exposure. The lens is left wide open during the entire time and isn't shut down, so it is just a good guess of what the shot might look like if you hit the shutter.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19383914
It cannot be the actual, it is a simulation (like you call out in parentheses), basically by raising or lowering the brightness of the EVF to close to what the light meter is indicating for the exposure. The lens is left wide open during the entire time and isn't shut down, so it is just a good guess of what the shot might look like if you hit the shutter.

Based on the screenshots for the R7 that are floating around there's a new Expo Simulation option, something like "Expo Simulation + DoF Preview", so it may be an option that engages DoF preview during expo sim which would stop down the aperture in then lens. Not sure how well it works, or if it would affect AF speed in some cases because of the loss of light from stopping down, but it was an interesting thing to see in the menu system

Choderboy wrote in post #19381745
It would be surprising if noise was worse than 90D or M6II.

I don't think 7D2 noise was legendary. It was good but not legendary.
For most Astro shooting it was cleaner than 6D or 1DX, ie, legendary, but astro is specialised and many users don't do any astro.

I think you misunderstood the point he's trying to convey, he's saying the 7D MKII noise issues are legendarily bad. I know what he what he means, I've got one...lol!

romeokc10 wrote in post #19383935
I think you misunderstood the point he's trying to convey, he's saying the 7D MKII noise issues are legendarily bad. I know what he what he means, I've got one...lol!

I guess we have examples on opposite ends of the sharpness bell chart.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19383869
I don't even know much of what my R5 does, and I've had it for 19 months already.

This doesn't exactly give me a lot of confidence, John !

Well I was going to wait until the holidays or my birthday but the better half is placing the preorder at B&H!

I am happy with the R for landscapes so the R7 should be a great companion to the R for the wildlife part. The 80D was a major step up from the 7D but having gotten used to mirrorless features and now animal eye AF it really makes sense to upgrade to the R7 now. Glad I held out for the R7 over the 90D.