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

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19383822
I think it’s rather funny that he complains it looks like a camera for a kid yet complains that it misses a pop-up flash.

LOL, even more funny to see you defend a loss in features and wave the pom-poms for whatever Canon puts out. Don't dare be critical of Canon! After all, that's NOT what forums are for! LOL!

ct1co2 wrote in post #19382964
Pretty lengthy video, but watched a replay of Adorama live with Rudy Winston. Some good info, they demo'd the auto leveling which I thought was pretty interesting, he indicated no grip (which has already been covered), and also the speedbooster is not an "officially" supported accessory, but folks can see if they will work.

That's a real interesting video. Thanks for posting it!

Now that it's the weekend, I'm going back through this thread and watching all of the videos that were linked. As it is, I was severely pushing the limit of what I could read and post on POTN at work this week!

I wonder if the reason CRAW works so well is because converting a raw image to RGB is already a lossy process. The sensor is a Bayer array, so only one of R, G, and B is known for each pixel. The conversion algorithm has to "guess" the other two by interpolating some number of neighboring pixels. How many neighbors are used, how they are weighted, and how to deal with changes in contrast to avoid weird edge effects are some of the "secret sauce" factors that differentiate one proprietary raw conversion algorithm from another.

Given that raw-to-RGB conversion is already inexact, the engineers at Canon probably have models to determine how much compression loss can be added to the raw data without affecting their reference conversion algorithm (likely the one in DPP) beyond some acceptable level.

Just pondering.

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 understood. I disagreed so much that I reversed the meaning of legendary.
Noise can be measured but it's still subjective when it comes to rating the noise characteristics of a camera.
It is a fact though, for long exposures, the 7D2 is much better than 6D.
So for an astro shooter, 7D2 noise performance is legendary, legendarily good.

ct1co2 wrote in post #19383445
I did a little searching around buffer capacity as I continue to be curious about CRAW handling but did not see burst limits referenced other than RAW and jpg. After a little hunting, I came across the UAE Canon site that had the info below.

"When using fast UHS-II SD memory cards, bursts of 51 RAW files, 187 CRAW files or 224 JPEG files can be captured at rates up to 15fps with the camera’s mechanical shutter. When using the electronic shutter at an incredible 30fps, bursts1 of up to 42 RAW files, 93 CRAW files and 126 JPEG files."

It seems that if you shoot in CRAW, which I often do with my R6, the buffer limit is much more substantial in both mechanical and electronic. I recognize that for straight RAW shooting, it may hamper some, but for anyone shooting CRAW, thought I'd pass along.

This is acceptable for me as I will be using the mechanical shutter most of the time. If I hit the buffer too much in RAW I can always try out CRAW.

I'm getting one for my wife, but I'm hoping she'll let me use it sometimes. I was disappointed that it didn't match the R5/R6 body style, but it will be great for her. She likes small, light and simple. She's been using a 77D with a Tamron 18-400 which she considers just shy of too big. The AF will be a huge improvement, the EV will be a help, and I think I can set it up so it will still be simple to use. The R10 is almost a better choice, but I don't like the smaller battery. I'm in charge of equipment when we travel and a single battery type will be nice.

I'm #2 on the list at my local camera shop, so I should be able to get my hands on it right after we get back from a trip to Alaska . I should have let Canon know my travel plans so they could adjust their schedule.

Has anyone seen anything that would indicate you can move the focus point the same way as the EOS R? I haven't. I am used to the R and there will probably be times when I forget there is a joystick. Hopefully dragging the focus point on the screen will work on the R7 too.

rndman wrote in post #19381728
With the announcement of the R7, let's start this new thread

R7 Specifications

https://downloads.cano​n.com …7_specification​s-5-22.pdf

I just noticed another "negative" looking at that PDF; there is no ALL-I video except for time lapse.

The PDF also says or implies that there is digital zoom of up to 10x in 1920/1080p mode.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19384501
I just noticed another "negative" looking at that PDF; there is no ALL-I video except for time lapse.

The R6 is the same way.

I have pre-ordered a Canon R7 to pair with my R6. I had previously paired it with the 5D Mark IV which I have rarely used since getting the R6.

I am hoping the R7 will offer me a closer functionality match than the 5D Mark IV though I have concerns about the change of the controls on the R7 and the inferior EVF.

However I had initially thought I would replace the 5D Mark IV with a R5 once the used prices came down so this is a much cheaper option - hopefully the right decision.

I, 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?

What I was trying to say there is that perhaps many of us have this idea that the camera somehow "stops" when the buffer fills and then it has to stop shooting to clear the buffer, but maybe it only seems that way because the shooting just slowed down so much that it seemed like a temporary "stop". There is no reason I can think of why the speed of shooting, once the buffer fills, is any slower than the hardware write speed to the card allows. With some systems and memory cards, the slowdown is so profound that it seems like a stop, and we are most likely to remember the most profound slowdowns as representative, because they make the greatest impression.

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!

The 7D2 has a bit more noise and it is a little bit more "chunky", compared to newer cameras, but when the 7D2 came out, it really didn't have a lot more noise than any FF Canon of its time cropped to 1.6x )maybe a little more than the 1Dx series); it was in fact better than the 5D3, and about the same as the 5D4 in daylight and slightly better than the 5D4 in incandescent light.

When sorting through people's personal anecdotes about noise, a lot of it is based arbitrary viewing scale and situational confounders. Much of the negativity around things like smaller pixels, smaller sensors, teleconverters, and slow telephotos comes from the fact that these things are typically chosen for more challenging subjects, in terms of size and distance, so no causality should be assumed.

The 7D2 and 5D3 were an older sensor generation. The 80D and 5D4 benefitted from a tech progression of a slightly but noticably cleaner sensor, I was told.

Regardless, I worked with the 7D2 sensor fine. Occassional iso of 12K+. Whatever.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19384654
What I was trying to say there is that perhaps many of us have this idea that the camera somehow "stops" when the buffer fills and then it has to stop shooting to clear the buffer, but maybe it only seems that way because the shooting just slowed down so much that it seemed like a temporary "stop". There is no reason I can think of why the speed of shooting, once the buffer fills, is any slower than the hardware write speed to the card allows. With some systems and memory cards, the slowdown is so profound that it seems like a stop, and we are most likely to remember the most profound slowdowns as representative, because they make the greatest impression.

Maybe because I, for one, have experienced it? It does stop shooting until it can fit at least one more shot. I suppose it depends on what you define as "stopping"..

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.

Fantastic feature of the EVF, yes!