R7 vs M6 II

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
RLight Senior Member • Posts: 3,959
R7 vs M6 II
12

Some references...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66275548

https://www.photonstophotos.net/rss.htm

.

I'll keep this short and sweet. The R7 gives access to RF glass, with crop sensor behind it with a larger buffer than the M6 II and full non-pixel-binned 4K. That's it. Oh, and IBIS, which name a lens this actually helps (that's not RF)? EF-S 10-22? Oh wait, that has shutter shock or AF miss? Wait what did I miss? Read the threads above, pretty damning stuff folks.

What didn't happen...

Photons to Photons (thanks Bill) shows this is the same sensor, with minor tweaks only. Figures. No major triumphs in dynamic range (other than base ISO by a half a stop), and no progress with ISO handling (some tweaks that give and take that in fact make it a draw in terms of total score).

What else didn't happen...

Despite EFCS adoption, there is shutter shock or AF-errors, particularly on EF-S adapted glass. This really stinks for those folks Canon is trying to woo over to RF platform from their 7D's or 80Ds as essentially they may have been better served with a 90D. Really begs the question was the world really ready for the R7? Or rather, was Canon? I'm being brief here with assumptions the readers understand that EF-S and EF glass use older slower protocols that don't support faster EVF refresh, faster AF calculations, and, use older optical formulas and that folks understand shutter shock issues of the M6 II are appearing on the R7 platform. I'm also assuming the reader understands the benefits of the M6 II sensor and that the R7 sensor, despite folks who bought it saying it's "better", isn't if you read those charts. It is, but it's no leapfrog, highly incremental tweaks only, same "guts" essentially. EF-M glass on the other hand, which is native crop, native mirrorless, doesn't share these dilemmas and exist already as a full collection. TL;DR, the benefits of the R7 at this juncture and lack of RF-S glass, are very minimal, to my surprise, but I shouldn't be. Simply put, the promises of the R7, unless you need a larger buffer and insane FPS speed, aren't fully realized due to required support of either adapted glass, or shutter shock/AF mishandling. Ouch.

.

What this really boils down to is Canon is still behind the curve here, a stacked CMOS sensor would've prevented shutter shock, could had faster more accurate AF, and, would be natively BSI, better ISO handling. As always, Canon's lack of chip-prowess is hurting them in terms of real progress. The promise of the R7 is largely unrealized without RF-S native glass, which may also never happen because Canon wants you to buy their expensive RF glass that already exists.

.

I'm not saying any of this to bash the R7, but it's obvious to me that despite being a paper tiger, in practice, it's not all that and a bag of chips compared to an M6 II and bag of EF-M glass. Sharper, smaller and newer glass. Having to adapt a EF-S 15-85 or EF-S 10-22, and not essentially getting “more” out of them then a 90D would, is disappointing. In fact, you might get less out of them. Again, that M6II with almost the same sensor, and better, cheaper, native glass…

 RLight's gear list:RLight's gear list
Canon G5 X II Canon EOS R Canon EOS M6 II Canon EF-M 15-45mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM +1 more
Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS R7
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
KEG
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
KEG
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow