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

Thanks.

VSS2011 wrote in post #19451706
Nice one, Lester. Is it edible?

From Wikipedia:

From WildFoodUK

So no.

Wild Red Fox.

Archibald wrote in post #19451182
Isn't random noise averaging a square root function? Not sure how it would apply here, but would guess averaging 4 images would halve the ISO.

John Sheehy wrote in post #19451284
You're applying photon noise math to exposure, where it shouldn't apply. What's the difference to photon noise if you expose 4x as long or use 4x as many exposures? The total photons is the same in both cases.

Archibald is correct. Both longer exposures or combining 4x as many exposures (or other signal acquisitions) are perfectly acceptable means to reduce noise, including shot noise.

Archibald wrote in post #19452072
Wild Red Fox.

Hosted photo: posted by Archibald in
./showthread.php?p=194​52072&i=i200118668
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Taken with focus on the shutter button, whole area AF, and with tracking and eye detect on.

That's a great shot!

How do you find the 800mm on the R7 in terms of framing the subject? I rented one for the lunar eclipse last month and I had a heck of a time just finding the moon in the viewfinder, but I only had the lens for a week. Obviously you nailed that shot. Have you found it easier to aim quickly the more you've used it?

mcoren wrote in post #19452124
That's a great shot!

How do you find the 800mm on the R7 in terms of framing the subject? I rented one for the lunar eclipse last month and I had a heck of a time just finding the moon in the viewfinder, but I only had the lens for a week. Obviously you nailed that shot. Have you found it easier to aim quickly the more you've used it?

Thanks! The fox was an unexpected interloper at a bird shoot.

I've mostly been shooting the 100-500mm recently because that is a new lens for me. But the 800mm is usually more useful because the critters are always so far away here, and I need the reach. Well, usually. The fox was 11-12 meters away and all I could do was get head and shoulder shots. (I was in a car.)

It can be a challenge finding the subject with this rig, but I find it just comes with practice. It was easy to spot the fox being so big. I also had blue jays in a tree a bit further away and I didn't always get them in the viewfinder initially. Here is one of them. It can be frustrating at times, like when the bird flies away before you can find it, but it's OK. I would not want to do BIF with the R7/800mm.

Here is one of the blue jays.

Archibald wrote in post #19452072
Wild Red Fox.

Hosted photo: posted by Archibald in
./showthread.php?p=194​52072&i=i200118668
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Taken with focus on the shutter button, whole area AF, and with tracking and eye detect on.

Archibald wrote in post #19452143
Thanks! The fox was an unexpected interloper at a bird shoot.
.
Here is one of the blue jays.

Hosted photo: posted by Archibald in
./showthread.php?p=194​52143&i=i121068611
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Shot with shutter button focus. I think SBF will work well for birds, but I am going to stick with BBF for bugs.

Nice shots with the RF800 Archie - it seems to produce excellent results in the right hands - Even if a little impractical for most purposes. Have you tried the RF1.4 teleconverter on the RF 100-500L yet? Should be interesting!

Archibald wrote in post #19452143
Thanks! The fox was an unexpected interloper at a bird shoot.

I've mostly been shooting the 100-500mm recently because that is a new lens for me. But the 800mm is usually more useful because the critters are always so far away here, and I need the reach. Well, usually. The fox was 11-12 meters away and all I could do was get head and shoulder shots. (I was in a car.)

It can be a challenge finding the subject with this rig, but I find it just comes with practice. It was easy to spot the fox being so big. I also had blue jays in a tree a bit further away and I didn't always get them in the viewfinder initially. Here is one of them. It can be frustrating at times, like when the bird flies away before you can find it, but it's OK. I would not want to do BIF with the R7/800mm.

Here is one of the blue jays.

Hosted photo: posted by Archibald in
./showthread.php?p=194​52143&i=i121068611
forum: Canon Digital Cameras

Shot with shutter button focus. I think SBF will work well for birds, but I am going to stick with BBF for bugs.

Great looking shots.

I agree finding subjects with long fixed focal lengths can be problematic.

I don't suppose you have the RF 1.4X?

I would be interested in the real world trade of 100-500+1.4X Vs the 800 STM.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #19452167
Great looking shots.

I agree finding subjects with long fixed focal lengths can be problematic.

I don't suppose you have the RF 1.4X?

I would be interested in the real world trade of 100-500+1.4X Vs the 800 STM.

Perhaps someone can answer this one?

Pity about the limitation on the collapsed physical length of the 100-500L when the adapter is used - 300mm + adapter. This makes it a long lens for fitting in the case without taking the adapter off every time it is used. I tended to keep my 1.4x on the 100-400L mkII most of the time and not notice the difference.

But I am just wondering if Sigma or any of the other manufacturers will be making a 1.4x teleconverter that will allow the full range of the lens to be used and maintain Canon's quality - what are your thoughts?

Ray.Petri wrote in post #19452173
Perhaps someone can answer this one?

Pity about the limitation on the collapsed physical length of the 100-500L when the adapter is used - 300mm + adapter. This makes it a long lens for fitting in the case without taking the adapter off every time it is used. I tended to keep my 1.4x on the 100-400L mkII most of the time and not notice the difference.

But I am just wondering if Sigma or any of the other manufacturers will be making a 1.4x teleconverter that will allow the full range of the lens to be used and maintain Canon's quality - what are your thoughts?

What about other manufacturers' ML cameras? Are there any non-protruding TCs created for them that work well?

One problem I can think of might be that it is difficult to make a good TC so close to the sensor that isn't protruding, which works well with a wide variety of lenses. Also, it could be a patent violation that Canon litigates against if there are any RF electronics in the TC to communicate with the system or lens, but then again, there are 3rd party RF control ring adapters out there that Canon seems to be doing nothing about.

A question on recommended SD cards (for still only). Is the Prograde Gold adequate (to handle the FPS and no hiccup after buffer full) or better to get the Cobalt.
Appreciate your response.
TIA.

rndman wrote in post #19452230
A question on recommended SD cards (for still only). Is the Prograde Gold adequate (to handle the FPS and no hiccup after buffer full) or better to get the Cobalt.
Appreciate your response.
TIA.

The R7 does not continue shooting after the buffer fills, until about 40% of the buffer is emptied to the card, when it starts shooting at full speed again until the buffer fills again. At least that's the way it works with 30fps e-shutter. I haven't tested it in other shutter modes and burst rates. I hate banging mechanical shutters just for tests!

John Sheehy wrote in post #19452242
The R7 does not continue shooting after the buffer fills, until about 40% of the buffer is emptied to the card, when it starts shooting at full speed again until the buffer fills again. At least that's the way it works with 30fps e-shutter. I haven't tested it in other shutter modes and burst rates. I hate banging mechanical shutters just for tests!

So, do I read this as "Go for fastest possible card"?

rndman wrote in post #19452251
So, do I read this as "Go for fastest possible card"?

Yes, for emptying the buffer, but that is the write speed and not the read speed which is what you get when only one speed is given in the product description. Write speed can be 1/4 of the read speed if not specified. I've tried 30fps with e-shutter with a card that could only take 10 MB/s, and with one that takes 280 MB/s, and the pattern is the same, it's just that the long pause between long bursts will be shorter (but still long enough that most people would just let go of the shutter button). In both cases it is 30fps shooting only; no period where the framerate drops.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #19452167
Great looking shots.

I agree finding subjects with long fixed focal lengths can be problematic.

I don't suppose you have the RF 1.4X?

I would be interested in the real world trade of 100-500+1.4X Vs the 800 STM.

These were taken on different days with different lighting, so maybe not a direct comparison. Both uncropped jpgs with some exposure adjustments.

Ray.Petri wrote in post #19452159
... Have you tried the RF1.4 teleconverter on the RF 100-500L yet? Should be interesting!

Lester Wareham wrote in post #19452167
I don't suppose you have the RF 1.4X?

I would be interested in the real world trade of 100-500+1.4X Vs the 800 STM.

I don't have the RF 1.4x and for now won't get it. Reasons are the very high price for what it is and the issue with the reduced range when used with the 100-500mm.

Also, I expect that cropping will give a similar result to using the 1.4x. It would be interesting to see actual tests, though, with the 800 and the 100-500mm.