-= Canon EOS R7 owners unite! Post photos and discuss.

Had some time to kill this AM, so dropped into my local GA airport to give the R7 some further testing to see how it would handle certain situations and what the outcomes would be like.

I used both mechanical and ES for prop planes, and mechanical will be highly preferred for airshows/aviation in my opinion. In mechanical props look good, and panning shots behave as expected. I still dislike the shutter sound. In ES, and truly not a surprise in any way, the rolling shutter rears its head. Props look bent outward, and straight line objects lean over when panning.

For kicks, I mashed the shutter on a sequence to see just how fast I'd hit the buffer in ES, and how many pics I'd have. I got 80 CRAW images in high speed burst, which seemed like a lot looking at the computer, but in real time it happened VERY fast, and the V60 card took a few seconds to clear. The ES high speed is definitely not a smart spray and pray approach to get key airshow moments if not anticipating them correctly. It would be real easy to hit the buffer prematurely trying to get the Blue Angels crossover. I also wonder how much the rolling shutter might effect how the opposing aircraft looks.

Mechanical shutter and panning. About a 40% crop.

This was the final image of the 80 image burst before the buffer intervened. Just a quick edit for color, no crop, and the "N" number has been hastily removed to be compliant with a different group I am in. I actually thought I'd get it further down the runway. The rolling shutter effects are very apparent as I can assure you the control tower is not fashioned after the leaning tower of Pisa.

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19408722
duck this morning the 2nd shot the mallard was about to hit me and had to swerve out of the way, the shot is not cropped. Too bad the AF didn't keep up with it but the wife loves the shot.

Canon R7

Hosted photo: posted by Jeff USN Photog 72-76 in
./showthread.php?p=194​08722&i=i67159160
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by Jeff USN Photog 72-76 in
./showthread.php?p=194​08722&i=i223768743
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

I love the 'Aaack!" expression on that duck... I have to agree, love the shot!

JayLT wrote in post #19408911
Thanks!

It seems to take them very well, but I did end up shelling out for the way-too-expensive Canon 25mm tube simply because I didn't trust my much lighter (and cheaper) third-party tubes with the weight of this lens hanging off of them...the last thing I wanted was to see this lens face down on the ground in my first weekend out with it! LOL

Wonderful images. I agree about the tubes - I had the experience of a lens dropping off the camera because of ill-fitting 3rd party tubes. Got Canon after that.

greyswan wrote in post #19409131
Wonderful images. I agree about the tubes - I had the experience of a lens dropping off the camera because of ill-fitting 3rd party tubes. Got Canon after that.

I had exactly the same experience with my 300 f/4 IS droped into sand; replaced the 3rd parties with Canon tubes.

ct1co2 wrote in post #19409123
This was the final image of the 80 image burst before the buffer intervened. Just a quick edit for color, no crop, and the "N" number has been hastily removed to be compliant with a different group I am in. I actually thought I'd get it further down the runway. The rolling shutter effects are very apparent as I can assure you the control tower is not fashioned after the leaning tower of Pisa.

Hosted photo: posted by ct1co2 in
./showthread.php?p=194​09123&i=i12106735
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Another example of rolling shutter. Again no crop just an adjustment for color/exposure and converted to jpg. This aircraft is stopped, but the rolling shutter shows up in the prop.

Hosted photo: posted by ct1co2 in
./showthread.php?p=194​09123&i=i246925996
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

ct1co2 wrote in post #19409116
Had some time to kill this AM, so dropped into my local GA airport to give the R7 some further testing to see how it would handle certain situations and what the outcomes would be like.

I used both mechanical and ES for prop planes, and mechanical will be highly preferred for airshows/aviation in my opinion. In mechanical props look good, and panning shots behave as expected. I still dislike the shutter sound. In ES, and truly not a surprise in any way, the rolling shutter rears its head. Props look bent outward, and straight line objects lean over when panning.

For kicks, I mashed the shutter on a sequence to see just how fast I'd hit the buffer in ES, and how many pics I'd have. I got 80 CRAW images in high speed burst, which seemed like a lot looking at the computer, but in real time it happened VERY fast, and the V60 card took a few seconds to clear. The ES high speed is definitely not a smart spray and pray approach to get key airshow moments if not anticipating them correctly. It would be real easy to hit the buffer prematurely trying to get the Blue Angels crossover. I also wonder how much the rolling shutter might effect how the opposing aircraft looks.

Mechanical shutter and panning. About a 40% crop.

Hosted photo: posted by ct1co2 in
./showthread.php?p=194​09116&i=i144413286
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Electronic shutter and panning. No crop. Prop is distorted and the runway markers are slightly bent. Yes, same plane, different sequence as they were doing touch and go pattern work.

Hosted photo: posted by ct1co2 in
./showthread.php?p=194​09116&i=i134560025
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Very useful series thanks.

The RS is not as bad as I expected but bad enough.

Bryan's R7 Review:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Ca​non-EOS-R7.aspx

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19398853
Don't quite understand the comment?

If I have two vehicles, one with a 12 gal tank and one with a 14 gal tank, and the pump I go to pumps at 12 gal a minute, in 1 minute, I will still only have 12 gallons of fuel in each tank.

It is even worse with data. 12 bit means 4096 tonal ranges, 14 bit means 16384... which equates to something like 68 billion colors vs 4 trillion colors. Our eyes can only maybe discern 4 million to 18 million colors. So all that extra data is mostly lost to us anyways, again until you start to really work the files pretty hard.

I just saw your post again and I'm not sure if I answered you back then.

When I said that 12-bit readout does not mean a 12-bit file, I meant that Canon manipulates the RAW data and turns it into 14 bits and then does some math on it and then it has more than 4096 values.

Jared's take on AF (and noise)

https://youtu.be/U99Gk​LDU6Ws

Immaculens wrote in post #19409167
Bryan's R7 Review:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Ca​non-EOS-R7.aspx

I've read a handful of R7 Reviews, but Bryan's (The Digital Picture) has put me over the edge to buy. Aside from his opening remarks insisting the R7 is the direct upgrade to the 7DmkII - its a good review - absent anything really critical...

Choderboy wrote in post #19408596
I don't have an R7.
I know with other Canon cameras, BBF can be assigned to a button, no surprise.
Assigning BBF to a button though, does not remove AF from the Shutter button. Most people will remove AF from the shutter when assigning BBF to another button.
Just don't do the 2nd step.

But then you still can't have manual full time override. You only get that if you remove af from the shutter button completely. It's weird, annoying, but true.

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19408618
If you use shutter button focus on the R7 as I do, if you set the "*" button to AF-OFF you hold that down and the shutter button focus is disabled. For Macro to me not ideal. or you could set one of the custom positions C1 C2 C3 to have no autofocus

or couldn't you just turn the auto focus off on the lens? My EF 100 2.8 has a AF/MF button so it will become manual focus only

Good work around, but still really annoying for anyone that's already found a use for *. I've got it semi solved using c1,c2 etc. But hardly as useful as just being able to use ftm when anytime I want it.

We've been without internet or cell phone coverage for the last few days. Glad to be able to communicate again.

My visit to Newfoundland was not intended to be photographic, I'm hear with my father and family to put my mother's ashes to rest in southern bay on the bonavista peninsula.

That said, I'm going to ask that you wish me luck.
Tomorrow, so many things have to go right, that results are a virtual impossibility. But if luck is with me every step, I just may have something to show despite not having my 100-400.

Fingers crossed.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19409271
We've been without internet or cell phone coverage for the last few days. Glad to be able to communicate again.

My visit to Newfoundland was not intended to be photographic, I'm hear with my father and family to put my mother's ashes to rest in southern bay on the bonavista peninsula.

That said, I'm going to ask that you wish me luck.
Tomorrow, so many things have to go right, that results are a virtual impossibility. But if luck is with me every step, I just may have something to show despite not having my 100-400.

Fingers crossed.

Good luck and sorry for your loss

Rod

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19409271
We've been without internet or cell phone coverage for the last few days. Glad to be able to communicate again.

My visit to Newfoundland was not intended to be photographic, I'm hear with my father and family to put my mother's ashes to rest in southern bay on the bonavista peninsula.

That said, I'm going to ask that you wish me luck.
Tomorrow, so many things have to go right, that results are a virtual impossibility. But if luck is with me every step, I just may have something to show despite not having my 100-400.

Fingers crossed.

Sorry for your loss. Wish you the best of luck.