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

Couple of test shots today

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19400560
Ah, I meant online shops. I checked all of them every day. Even every Amazon in the EU!

Wow, you are keen!

Can't see that getting me ahead of the queues in the other suppliers TBH.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19400433
I just watched Duade Patton's video that gossamer linked to. I first thought I might do as he did: set aperture on the lens's control ring but that won't solve the problem for me because with the R7 I expect to also be using my old EF lenses again. It's just such a strange thing of Canon to do, change the whole button layout. What were they thinking?!

Thanks very much, Ari and hammer!

I got the control ring EF adapter and use it to change the EV but it could be set for ISO or f-stop

Lester Wareham wrote in post #19400579
Wow, you are keen!

Can't see that getting me ahead of the queues in the other suppliers TBH.

You would think that, right, but it really is how I got my R6: there suddenly was a shop having a few in stock (or maybe just the one, I don't know, 5 minutes later it said "out of stock" again). I was on my daily round, saw it, bought one and canceled my pre-order elsewhere.

Bianchi wrote in post #19400477
Overall it seems to be a nice new feature, but as you say, not very user friendly to activate fast. Maybe there a workaround yet to be discovered, or a firmware update will resolve that.

Another issue is you have to use Canon software at this time to extract the Roll to get to the CR3 files you want, hopefully, eventually you will be able to use other software editors to do that. Once again more steps to get to your CR3 file.

On a scale of 1-10 a 5 for user friendly. The best thing I could see it for is, when your waiting for a bird to fly from a perch, you will get that series of shots, so long as you keep that shutter 1/2 down prior to releasing shutter .

another downside for me is that when I have the shutter at half I keep pressing it by mistake, you know that only by the slider going red so you can lose a shot

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19400583
I got the control ring EF adapter and use it to change the EV but it could be set for ISO or f-stop

I don't know how I will set it, but however I end up doing it, I will need to develop new muscle memory. I will no doubt want the aperture on the rear dial, like I've had it since well, forever, with the shutter speed on the top dial. ISO may have to be done the default way, with a button and then a dial, the way it was done on my 1D cameras. It was so great to finally have a dedicated ISO button on the R6 and now they've gone backwards with this. I don't think Canon designed this camera for all manual use, that's for sure.

Thanks. I am checking this out now.

Thanks, looking into this now. I knew it would be operator error ߤ

Thanks TeamSpeed.

Lester Wareham wrote in post #19400500
Have you got the IBIS on or off?

IBIS is on.

JayLT wrote in post #19400499
Tracking on mirrorless takes a lot of practice and getting used to compared to the OVF's. I haven't had a chance to shoot any props with the R7 but I've done it quite a bit with the R5 at a couple different airshows. The movement in the viewfinder just isn't as smooth as an optical one. I enable the diaginal and 3x3 lines in the viewfinder, and put the middle of the "X" on the part of the plane or helo I'm tracking and just do my best to keep it there while shooting bursts. I usually get some good results with that.

Thanks for the warning . I have ordered the 100-500 and it arrives tomorrow. I'm going to Oshkosh this month, so I will practice on cars at low shutter speeds and see how they turn out.

Burst with pre-shot

Spent some time sitting at my desk in my den shooting out an open window at my birdfeeders about 20 feet away. I decided to try my EF 55-250 lens, works pretty good.

There were a bunch of interesting captures, but this is the one I like the best. Not that big a deal to cull the cr3's out of the file.

Canon R7

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19400479
Are you able to rent it like Jeff? Perhaps it might be a worthwhile exercise in having it for a week just to make sure you are happy with its performance?

Yeah Probably could. But pretty sure with faster glass people will be OK when light is low. I will be in TV mode with shutter speeds at 1/400 and move up and see where it lands with auto ISO and then I can see what its going to do at zero and -1/3.....If its landing at 4.0 through 5.6 in low light Then Its going to work for my needs

jbrackjr wrote in post #19400482
Previously posted in the other R7 forum.

Question for those who have or have had the EF100-400mm v2 and the RF100-500mm.

My EF lens works well with the R7 body. Just as good as on the 90D. If I would purchase the RF100-500mm, I would assume image quality would be as good or maybe better than my EF lens. My question is, would the native combo give me better IS?

When at airshow with prop aircraft and helos your SS is usually between 1/60 & 320. I am no longer able to pan and have the majority of pics in focus at 400mm and with the t/c it only gets worse. I have resorted to a gimbal/tripod. But that just stinks.

Jets are no problem at this time.


On another note, my refurb RF 800 f11 became intermittent in autofocusing. I was going to try another one but none in stock so a refund is planned upon return. My copy was ok but not as sharp as I had hoped. If I could get a sharp copy, I would buy it again. Great for land animals but not for BIF.

Im not excited at all about the 100-500. Too many negatives for me, especially with a TC...I would rather buy a used 100-400 and put a version 111 1.4 TC on it or just use the 100-400 and give up to 100mm reach. You can get a nice used 100-400 for 15-1600....thats 1/2 price of the 100-500.....for 3k you are much better off spending some extra and getting a used 400 DO.....thats 560mm FOV at F/5.6 and if you use a TC and ADD THE CROP FACTOR.....WERE AT AT 900MM FOV.....I keep talking myself into a 400 DO

I love my 100-400 on the R6, I see absolutely no reason to go to the 100-500. If you actually look at the difference in 400 vs 500, it isn’t a huge change and you have enough resolution to help a bit to compensate.

I would rather spend money on other RF lenses that have no EF equivalent.