R7 JPEG Output

TeeJay626 wrote:

I've been a RAW only shooter for at least 10 years now and whenever I chose to see JPEG quality out of my DSLR's, I've always been disappointed and it reaffirmed my desire to shoot RAW only. I've had the T3i, 60D, 77D and 80D. I also had the R6.

Every single model of Canon camera has its default processing and processing parameter effects tuned differently.

When you buy a more consumer oriented body, it has processing defaults set to be far more punchy: more sharpness applied, greater contrast, more saturated colors, etc. Also, those cameras typically allow for the processing controls to go further in doing those things than a pro body would.

So when you buy a T3i and compare it to the output from something of the same time like your 80D, the default JPEGs will appear punchy from the T3i and more muted from the 80D, although the real comparison would be with a pro body versus the T3i if you wanted to see much more of a difference.

I currently have the R7 and R10 and still shoot the same way.

The same is probably occurring here: The R10 is cheaper and the R7 is aimed at a more serious enthusiast.

However, I always watch a lot of videos about my cameras and I've noticed that quite a few reviewers are saying how good the JPEG quality OOC is on the R7.

I recently went shooting with my wife (she has the R10) at a local wildlife refuge and honestly I was a little let down with some of the images. I was using the R7 with the RF 100-400, while she was using the adapted EF 70-300 nano USM II. We are both wildlife shooters and mostly had shore birds.

Many of my RAW files were disappointing. Some were very soft, noisy (to be expected) and just....blah. I do know that atmospheric waves were possibly an issue, but I felt let down.

Soft because the default sharpness is less aggressive, and more noisy because noise reduction defaults start at a lower base level than the R10 (almost certainly, but you'd have to confirm this yourself, which would be a very easy test).

Today I did some testing shooting in both RAW and JPEG. All I can say is WOW...the JPEG files right OOC were excellent! When I process my RAW files, I use DxO Pure Raw 2 and have a suite of Topaz products and finalize in Lightroom Classic. The JPEGs only needed some minor color adjustment and slight use of DeNoise. I may be changing my shooting style.

Here are a couple of the JPEGs with minor adjustments in Lightroom. Not too shabby.

There's nothing wrong with JPEGs and if they work for your then carry on. It sounds like you'd benefit from a better understanding of why you see differences in JPEGs between bodies. RAW files will always respond better to editing, which is why I always recommend shooting RAW + JPEG. As your RAW editing skills improve, going back to old RAW files will allow you to get even better results. Once a JPEG is encoded, the detail that allows for extremely flexible editing is simply gone.