R7 and Macro

Hi Folks,

I am thinking about upgrading from a DSLR to a R7 for macro work.  Ive been reading lots of threads about the R7 - mostly used for sports or birding.  The issues seem to be more with fast moving subjects and the ES and EFCS (rolling shutter), noisy mechanical shutter and vibration.  One application I plan on will be with LED lighting indoors (flash not available with EFCS).  However, one of the cons noted was banding with artificial lights.  So, I curious if anyone has had experience with LED lights and the R7 or other R bodies and EFCS.  Thanks!

Flash does work with EFCS but not with full electronic shutter

I think the banding issue with artificial lights depends on the quality of the lights.  I haven’t tried them with my R7, but I have some Westcott Solix led lights that I’ve used with my R5 and EF100 l macro, and never had a problem.  Also have a Genaray Full Moon led light that I’ve used a lot without any banding issues.

Marceppy wrote:

Hi Folks,

I am thinking about upgrading from a DSLR to a R7 for macro work. Ive been reading lots of threads about the R7 - mostly used for sports or birding. The issues seem to be more with fast moving subjects and the ES and EFCS (rolling shutter), noisy mechanical shutter and vibration. One application I plan on will be with LED lighting indoors (flash not available with EFCS). However, one of the cons noted was banding with artificial lights. So, I curious if anyone has had experience with LED lights and the R7 or other R bodies and EFCS. Thanks!

The R7 is my dedicated macro camera.  I keep the RF 100 f/2.8L pretty much “permanently” attached, and I use LEDs the majority of the time because I like to use the Focus Bracketing feature (it’s eShutter only).

Most portable LED panels that are made for photography and video don’t flicker (check to be sure though).  I really like the Aputure Amaran AL-F7 LEDs.  Very powerful with continuously variable output and color.  I also just bought the Comer Radiance 360  LED.  It’s even more powerful, but a little smaller in surface area.  Both purchased from B&H.

Here’s a picture of the Aputures…

Bracket from FleaBay.

R2

Thanks I appreciate the information.  The birding, wildlife, sporting, landscape R7 thread had pushed me back towards a 5dM4 due to the comments about the image issues with the R7.  Some of what was being discussed did not relate to a macro setup so I thought Id ask the folks that have experience.

I spoke with CPS last week and specifically about the R7 flash capability in EFCS which was --  "it does not trigger flash speedlights. "   If you have found a way to make it work .. please explain in detail.

Any experience pro or con for using the R7 or other Rs for macro would be appreciated.

Ive been back and forth on the fence with the R7 and a DLSR

Marceppy wrote:

Thanks I appreciate the information. The birding, wildlife, sporting, landscape R7 thread had pushed me back towards a 5dM4 due to the comments about the image issues with the R7. Some of what was being discussed did not relate to a macro setup so I thought Id ask the folks that have experience.

I spoke with CPS last week and specifically about the R7 flash capability in EFCS which was -- "it does not trigger flash speedlights. " If you have found a way to make it work .. please explain in detail.

Any experience pro or con for using the R7 or other Rs for macro would be appreciated.

Ive been back and forth on the fence with the R7 and a DLSR

CPS likely misinterpreted what you said and spoke about the fully electronic shutter rather than the EFCS. The EFCS certainly does trigger the flash, and you actually need to use it to get the highest sync speed of 1/320th, the mechanical shutter has a max sync speed of 1/250th, per the manual;

https://cam.start.canon/en/C005/manual/html/UG-04_Shooting-1_0140.html

I use the R7 and R5 for macro all the time, they're great, but just like most things, switching to mirrorless does need some adjustments.  The EVF versus OVF can be difficult for some as you need to remember to turn off the exposure simulation setting when using a flash.  However the EVF does still have some nice advantages, as it will show the magnification meter (basically focus distance meter) in the EVF so you know how much closer you can get without guessing.

I guess I'm one of the few that mostly use AF when shooting macro, but usually what I shoot like to move around and fast AF can be helpful, and the R5/7 are very fast focusing, especially with the RF 100mm (but still very fast with the EF 100mm L in my experience as well).

Overall, I don't miss my 90D or 5Ds.

Marceppy wrote:

Hi Folks,

I am thinking about upgrading from a DSLR to a R7 for macro work. [...] (flash not available with EFCS). However, one of the cons noted was banding with artificial lights. So, I curious if anyone has had experience with LED lights and the R7 or other R bodies and EFCS. Thanks!

I've personally used the R7, in EFCS mode, with an EL-100 speedlite. And it worked as it should.

Marceppy wrote:

Hi Folks,

I am thinking about upgrading from a DSLR to a R7 for macro work. Ive been reading lots of threads about the R7 - mostly used for sports or birding. The issues seem to be more with fast moving subjects and the ES and EFCS (rolling shutter), noisy mechanical shutter and vibration. One application I plan on will be with LED lighting indoors (flash not available with EFCS). However, one of the cons noted was banding with artificial lights. So, I curious if anyone has had experience with LED lights and the R7 or other R bodies and EFCS. Thanks!

Flash is of course available (and I have used it) with EFCS, but not with ES. Your info from CPS is simply wrong. I suspect your interest is automatic focus bracketing, as that uses ES and is incompatible with flash in the Canon system.  I have used a rechargeable LED light panel with my R5, and RP, no issues with banding or flickering.  You won’t have any trouble with an R7.

charlyw64 wrote:

Marceppy wrote:

Thanks I appreciate the information. The birding, wildlife, sporting, landscape R7 thread had pushed me back towards a 5dM4 due to the comments about the image issues with the R7.

What image issues? As often on these forums IMHO the "problems" are blown out of proportion. You have a fast mechanical shutter working at up to 15 fps, the shutter shock of the fully mechanical shutter (in case you are worried about that) is still smaller than the mirror slap on many if not all DSLR. For birding, wildlife you won't be using lenses faster than f/2 where the shadow of the second shutter curtain in EFCS would influence the bokeh highlights, so you can easily use EFCS without any problems. Yes, the sensor readout in fully electronic shutter is slow and limited to 12 bit A/D conversion (EFCS and mechanical shutter work with 14 bit A/D conversion). The place where the slow sensor readout becomes problematic will be the pre burst shooting (where you may lose the odd shot from the burst when parts of the subject move too fast for the sensor readout or your panning screws up the background) - but that option doesn't exist in the DSLR at all, so that is a rather moot point to revert to a previous technology because a new option isn't without limitations.

+1

The focus stacking though I consider a useless gimmick. Focus stacks do not work for my subjects (insects and native orchids) at all, so that is a feature that may impress NOOBs

Well your entitled to your opinion even if I think a bit harsh - IMHO focus stacking can work well with orchids and insects in the field with some effort put in, such as with Helicon Soft - with images looking fine at A3 size prints free of artefacts normally with some work.

but the only lens that this could work with doesn't even have an autofocus motor (MP/E 65mm f/2.8, at 5:1 magnification ratio the subject size vs. magnification changes in a macro stack between overlapping subject areas is small enough to not completely mess up the stack)...

Now get that for extreme > 1X macro.

Semi-macro 0.5-1.0 life size and the amazing range of macros available can work just fine with focus stacking.

The positive feedback is certainly reassuring and appreciated.  The LED lighting information is good to know.

When I spoke with CPS, perhaps I didn’t ask the right question regarding the flash. I may call again they are helpful.

I have the MP-e65 1-5x macro lens and the Macro Twin Lite MT-26EX-RT that I use often with the 1DM4.  Any experience using the latter lens and flash with the R7?  I’d be using a ef-R adapter.  Will also be using the ef 100mm f2.8 macro lens, and extension tubes.

Marceppy wrote:

Hi Folks,

I am thinking about upgrading from a DSLR to a R7 for macro work. Ive been reading lots of threads about the R7 - mostly used for sports or birding. The issues seem to be more with fast moving subjects and the ES and EFCS (rolling shutter), noisy mechanical shutter and vibration. One application I plan on will be with LED lighting indoors (flash not available with EFCS). However, one of the cons noted was banding with artificial lights. So, I curious if anyone has had experience with LED lights and the R7 or other R bodies and EFCS. Thanks!

No issues whatsoever in using my R7 indoors, with practically any kind of lighting on EFCS. Even the "dreaded" weird bokeh - I couldn't reproduce it for the life of me.

charlyw64 wrote:

KevinRA wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Marceppy wrote:

Thanks I appreciate the information. The birding, wildlife, sporting, landscape R7 thread had pushed me back towards a 5dM4 due to the comments about the image issues with the R7.

What image issues? As often on these forums IMHO the "problems" are blown out of proportion. You have a fast mechanical shutter working at up to 15 fps, the shutter shock of the fully mechanical shutter (in case you are worried about that) is still smaller than the mirror slap on many if not all DSLR. For birding, wildlife you won't be using lenses faster than f/2 where the shadow of the second shutter curtain in EFCS would influence the bokeh highlights, so you can easily use EFCS without any problems. Yes, the sensor readout in fully electronic shutter is slow and limited to 12 bit A/D conversion (EFCS and mechanical shutter work with 14 bit A/D conversion). The place where the slow sensor readout becomes problematic will be the pre burst shooting (where you may lose the odd shot from the burst when parts of the subject move too fast for the sensor readout or your panning screws up the background) - but that option doesn't exist in the DSLR at all, so that is a rather moot point to revert to a previous technology because a new option isn't without limitations.

+1

The focus stacking though I consider a useless gimmick. Focus stacks do not work for my subjects (insects and native orchids) at all, so that is a feature that may impress NOOBs

Well your entitled to your opinion even if I think a bit harsh - IMHO focus stacking can work well with orchids and insects in the field with some effort put in, such as with Helicon Soft - with images looking fine at A3 size prints free of artefacts normally with some work.

I haven't seen a single artefact free image at that size which didn't took days to invent the areas that the focus stack can't capture for physical reasons...

but the only lens that this could work with doesn't even have an autofocus motor (MP/E 65mm f/2.8, at 5:1 magnification ratio the subject size vs. magnification changes in a macro stack between overlapping subject areas is small enough to not completely mess up the stack)...

Now get that for extreme > 1X macro.

Semi-macro 0.5-1.0 life size and the amazing range of macros available can work just fine with focus stacking.

As I said, I have been photographing macro for 20 years now and even dabbled in focus stacking at times before cameras could try it themselves - and I haven't seen a single successful image from others or myself where there weren't major artefacts from halos around elements closest to the camera where they overlapped background elements, to multiplication of limbs because of movement (proboscis or feelers are the most likely culprits), to unnatural background translations, to the lack of any sense of depth in the subject (you can't tell which feeler for example is oriented towards the camera or away from it and where it is attached to the insect... Nothing can prevent those issues and the reason the worst (the halos around overlapping elements that obscure the elements further away) are not happening is due to high (or low) magnification ratio, when the magnification ratio is high the effective aperture is big compared to the size of the subject which will render those elements completely transparent and (more importantly) the magnification ratio doesn't significantly differ from the stack layer that contains the sharp element compared to the sharp layer that contains the element further away.

technically correct I appreciate and seen it plenty of times - often can be largely remediated I'd suggest to adequate level....

IMHO stacks are a matter for technical documentation but in aesthetic photography they are lacking in oh so many ways that they are not worth pursuing (unless you need to do technical accurate documentary shots)...

So I wouldn't get my hopes up if I were the OP that focus stacking solves any problems unless his subjects are those 0.01% of subjects that don't have any overlapping areas and which look good artificially flattened as if they had been pressed flat in a specimen collection book from a 19th century botanist...

It's a discussion forum - all entitled to different perspectives.

Mine is otherwise for much more than 0.01% subjects unless one is pixel peeping at 200% or viewing an A0 print.   (Somethings yes one cant get good results - but sometimes I think especially with Helicon one can adequately and be useful and artistic).

Thanks for all the replies, great help.  Canon CPS did confirm flash availability with the R7 and my EX series flashed would work.

dwkdnvr wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

I see you've used Olympus before - it would definitely be worth checking out the OM-1 before you decide. More expensive though.

It really does seem that the R7 and OM-1 are the 2 bodies to look at if you're considering the areas where crop has advantages or at least where the downsides are mitigated - telephoto/wildlife and macro. The OM-1 is more expensive, but has the very good Oly 60mm macro available which evens out the pricing if you're pairing the R7 with either of the 100mm lenses.

I'm considering the R7 + RF 100-400 + a macro, but was considering the EF-S 60mm on an adapter. Probably not close to the performance of the 100's, but at $300-ish used it's an easier first step and it does seem to be one of the better regarded EF-S lenses.

My copy of the EF-S 60mm is sharper than my (now sold) copies of the EF100 non-L and EF100L, when used on an M6II. I sadly didn’t compare it to the RF100L when I rented an R7.

The EF-S 60mm is an older lens, from a time where Canon had significant copy to copy variations, so YMMV.