Will there be an R7 Mk II ?

Messier Object wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

and only list this because you need to be negative about something. I have used the 7DII for 8 years (got one on the day of the initial release) and never have used it without additional weather gear because not all of my lenses are weather sealed and those that are were bought mostly second hand and thus I have no knowledge how well their gaskets have been maintained. Thus there is a big gaping hole in the sealing...Have you seen the videos of Wild Alaska? He was using the R5 alongside the R7 on one trip in atrocious weather and the weather sealed R5 conked out first IIRC.

Compared to the mirror slap of the 7DII the shutter shock in the R7 is minute

Now wait a minute ! So your telling me, the 7D II has such crazy mirror slap, that it might knock the camera straight out of your hands, and scare wildlife on the other side of the forest ?!?! .... because it would really "have to" to be any worse than the R7 !

I can use them side by side, the mirror slap of the 7DII is more pronounced and louder than the R7 full mechanical shutter and you can easily use the EFCS to reduce that without incurring the wrath of the rolling shutter, the bokeh effect of the EFCS doesn't bother me at all.

I find that hard to believe. I owned the original 7D, and although it's been a while, I don't think it was near as loud and shocking as the R7 in MS mode.

The 7D is worse still - picked up my wife's 7D and compared side by side the order is 7D, 7DII and then R7. Memory is tainted by it's gradual decay, you never had the direct comparison and you never were treated to the ES silence...

with its mirror locked up the 7DII's shutter sound at 10fps is, to my ear, much 'softer' (less high frequency "clack") than the R7's harsh mech shutter at 15fps.

It probably is. I don't have my 7DII anymore, and never shot it with the mirror locked up. Shooting like that isn't really an option for most action or wildlife shooting, except maybe some wildlife shooting on a tripod. For most uses of the 7DII, what's relevant is what it sounds like in OVF mode. Whether it's the mirror or the shutter that's responsible for most of the noise isn't really relevant, if it's the actual volume of the noise that bothers people (or birds). If we're talking about shutter shock, on the other hand, it might be relevant, depending on whether the mirror slap also produces the same kind of effect.

my point was that the 7DII’s shutter sound (not shutter plus mirror action) seems to be softer than the R7’s mechanical shutter

It is and does not vibrate as much.

Peter

Steve Balcombe wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

As long as you are fully aware of the rolling shutter problems in ES mode, and you're satisfied that they won't be an issue for you, the R7 with a 100-500 is hard to beat, especially for the price.

Rolling shutter has not been an issue. But the 100-500 is not generally long enough for me, and IMPO, it's overpriced. I know... Actually, "I hear" it's a great lens. I rented one, and it sucked. But TBH, I have reason to believe mine had been damaged. Moving my "slow" RF 800 F11 though 👍

Obviously you can't ignore your own experience, but there is something odd here. My 100-500 is superb, and I shoot it wide open almost all the time. Many others report the same. It's even good with the RF 1.4x Extender, which I find remarkable - I've always believed that Extenders only work really well on the big whites, but that is no longer true.

On the price, BTW, yes it is expensive, but the EF 100-400L IS II lists at £2679 (widely available at £2449 and Amazon currently has a big discount to £2156. The RF 100-500 is £2899 so not that much more for a much newer lens with improved reach and performance.

Well, apparently mine had been subjected to a slam or drop, and it had a small cracked ring. I never noticed it. But after I sent it back, they tried to say that I caused it, and they had a photo of a very small, hairline crack, in a plastic ring in the piece that extends… like bushing or something. I contested that, and told them that it never got banged or dropped in my hands. They agreed it could have happened in shipping, and it would have been easy to overlook, so they dropped the charges. 
Anyway, that experience probably saved me $2900 🙂👍

Btw, at that time, all I had was the R5, and 500mm was definitely not long enough for most of my shooting. I did rent the 1.4 + 2.0 TC along with it, but that made it so slow, I might as well been using myRF 800 F11. In fact, I believe with the 2.0 it was an F13…. 1.4 was F9 I believe ? 
Anyway, I’d kind of like to try a “good copy” on my R7, and I suspect it would do way better than the damaged copy on my R5, but now I have the RF 600 F11 as well, which is great for closer stuff. Heck, the 600 with and extension tube has a MFD  of about 8ft…. And with the equivalent of 960mm I can fill the frame with Hummers, Kinglets, Butterflies, etc.

And really, if I had the 100-500, it would probably stay pegged at 500, 95% of the time, and that’s with at least the 1.4 TC on it. I just need reach a lot more than flexibility.

I love my R7 and am still amazed that Canon could put together such a camera with these spec's for $1500.-- and with the RF 100-400 or even better with the 100-500L it truly is an excellent choice for birds and wildlife.  My R5 is mostly gathering dust these days.

No complaints here!

Bramble9

charlyw64 wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

and only list this because you need to be negative about something. I have used the 7DII for 8 years (got one on the day of the initial release) and never have used it without additional weather gear because not all of my lenses are weather sealed and those that are were bought mostly second hand and thus I have no knowledge how well their gaskets have been maintained. Thus there is a big gaping hole in the sealing...Have you seen the videos of Wild Alaska? He was using the R5 alongside the R7 on one trip in atrocious weather and the weather sealed R5 conked out first IIRC.

Compared to the mirror slap of the 7DII the shutter shock in the R7 is minute

Now wait a minute ! So your telling me, the 7D II has such crazy mirror slap, that it might knock the camera straight out of your hands, and scare wildlife on the other side of the forest ?!?! .... because it would really "have to" to be any worse than the R7 !

I can use them side by side, the mirror slap of the 7DII is more pronounced and louder than the R7 full mechanical shutter and you can easily use the EFCS to reduce that without incurring the wrath of the rolling shutter, the bokeh effect of the EFCS doesn't bother me at all.

I find that hard to believe. I owned the original 7D, and although it's been a while, I don't think it was near as loud and shocking as the R7 in MS mode.

The 7D is worse still - picked up my wife's 7D and compared side by side the order is 7D, 7DII and then R7. Memory is tainted by it's gradual decay, you never had the direct comparison and you never were treated to the ES silence...

with its mirror locked up the 7DII's shutter sound at 10fps is, to my ear, much 'softer' (less high frequency "clack") than the R7's harsh mech shutter at 15fps.

It probably is. I don't have my 7DII anymore, and never shot it with the mirror locked up. Shooting like that isn't really an option for most action or wildlife shooting, except maybe some wildlife shooting on a tripod. For most uses of the 7DII, what's relevant is what it sounds like in OVF mode. Whether it's the mirror or the shutter that's responsible for most of the noise isn't really relevant, if it's the actual volume of the noise that bothers people (or birds). If we're talking about shutter shock, on the other hand, it might be relevant, depending on whether the mirror slap also produces the same kind of effect.

my point was that the 7DII’s shutter sound (not shutter plus mirror action) seems to be softer than the R7’s mechanical shutter

It is and does not vibrate as much.

Peter

When put side by side, the 7D2 is louder and has a stronger vibration from mirror slap than the mechanical shutter of the R7, use the live view on the 7D2 and it is much more silent and has little vibration - as now it is using EFCS. So now you need to put the R7 into that mode (you would be well advised to use that anyways, the mechanical shutter only is needed for extremely fast lenses wide open to preserve their bokeh) and there is little difference!

I have been using EFCS on all my ML bodies. I did experiment a little with ES on the R7.

Zeee wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

and only list this because you need to be negative about something. I have used the 7DII for 8 years (got one on the day of the initial release) and never have used it without additional weather gear because not all of my lenses are weather sealed and those that are were bought mostly second hand and thus I have no knowledge how well their gaskets have been maintained. Thus there is a big gaping hole in the sealing...Have you seen the videos of Wild Alaska? He was using the R5 alongside the R7 on one trip in atrocious weather and the weather sealed R5 conked out first IIRC.

Compared to the mirror slap of the 7DII the shutter shock in the R7 is minute

Now wait a minute ! So your telling me, the 7D II has such crazy mirror slap, that it might knock the camera straight out of your hands, and scare wildlife on the other side of the forest ?!?! .... because it would really "have to" to be any worse than the R7 !

I can use them side by side, the mirror slap of the 7DII is more pronounced and louder than the R7 full mechanical shutter and you can easily use the EFCS to reduce that without incurring the wrath of the rolling shutter, the bokeh effect of the EFCS doesn't bother me at all.

I find that hard to believe. I owned the original 7D, and although it's been a while, I don't think it was near as loud and shocking as the R7 in MS mode.

The 7D is worse still - picked up my wife's 7D and compared side by side the order is 7D, 7DII and then R7. Memory is tainted by it's gradual decay, you never had the direct comparison and you never were treated to the ES silence...

with its mirror locked up the 7DII's shutter sound at 10fps is, to my ear, much 'softer' (less high frequency "clack") than the R7's harsh mech shutter at 15fps.

It probably is. I don't have my 7DII anymore, and never shot it with the mirror locked up. Shooting like that isn't really an option for most action or wildlife shooting, except maybe some wildlife shooting on a tripod. For most uses of the 7DII, what's relevant is what it sounds like in OVF mode. Whether it's the mirror or the shutter that's responsible for most of the noise isn't really relevant, if it's the actual volume of the noise that bothers people (or birds). If we're talking about shutter shock, on the other hand, it might be relevant, depending on whether the mirror slap also produces the same kind of effect.

my point was that the 7DII’s shutter sound (not shutter plus mirror action) seems to be softer than the R7’s mechanical shutter

It is and does not vibrate as much.

Peter

When put side by side, the 7D2 is louder and has a stronger vibration from mirror slap than the mechanical shutter of the R7, use the live view on the 7D2 and it is much more silent and has little vibration - as now it is using EFCS. So now you need to put the R7 into that mode (you would be well advised to use that anyways, the mechanical shutter only is needed for extremely fast lenses wide open to preserve their bokeh) and there is little difference!

I have been using EFCS on all my ML bodies. I did experiment a little with ES on the R7.

Putting more thought to this. The R7 is the first body since my 20D that when I tried the burst I said what heck is this. At first I thought it was broken. I don't have the 7D2 anymore to compare vibrations but I know I did not react the same way when I tried it for the first time. I can't compare the vibration so have to take peoples words for it. I know the 7D2 does have a mirror dampening system that was a new design but mirror slap was still there. At one time I had video about that dampening system but deleted it after selling the 7D2.

I'm not struggling with the R7. I just would have preferred a smoother (for better words) shutter. Something like my R6II and my old R5 was.

charlyw64 wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Putting more thought to this. The R7 is the first body since my 20D that when I tried the burst I said what heck is this. At first I thought it was broken. I don't have the 7D2 anymore to compare vibrations but I know I did not react the same way when I tried it for the first time.

Memory can be forgiving - but also you were used to the noise DSLR make. You now have had quite a few mirrorless and you are comparing with those. I didn't, I still have the 7D, the 7DII and now new the R7, so I could make the direct comparison. Even with the 7DII in EFCS I get a slight shutter slap that shows up when taking macro shots (which is where my focus lies predominantly now) and I am shooting a series of images in short succession because I am photographing when the wind has just died down and my subject hasn't still fully settled down (not knowing when the wind picks up again). I look forward to using the ES when the situation arises, I just need to assess if the image quality suffers due to the 12 bit A/D conversion in ES, compared to the 14 bit A/D conversion in EFCS/MS...

Not sure what others think about this.

https://photographylife.com/14-bit-vs-12-bit-raw

I'm not struggling with the R7. I just would have preferred a smoother (for better words) shutter. Something like my R6II and my old R5 was.

Wishing for something better is a natural thing, getting it at the price point is another matter altogether, we all wanted to get the 1DxIII focusing system and the rugged build at the price point of the 7DII but we didn't get it. Realistic expectations go a long way to not get overzealous and in the end being disappointed about what is offered.

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

So there isn't much I'd like to change on my R7, except for maybe a small extension on the bottom right for my little finger, and someplace to attach a hand strap. I don't even need a full battery grip. Yes, I kill batteries pretty fast, but I carry a bunch of them, and they are very easy to change. Also, a bigger buffer would help. When it comes to MP's, I always like more of them for cropability, but I question as to whether more MP's could be crammed on to the smaller crop sensor, and still maintain at least the same IQ ? I understand their are physics to deal with.

And while I'm asking, is their a better crop sensor mirrorless camera for birding than the R7 ? Even from other manufacturers ? Open to opinions.

Eventually

Zeee wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Putting more thought to this. The R7 is the first body since my 20D that when I tried the burst I said what heck is this. At first I thought it was broken. I don't have the 7D2 anymore to compare vibrations but I know I did not react the same way when I tried it for the first time.

Memory can be forgiving - but also you were used to the noise DSLR make. You now have had quite a few mirrorless and you are comparing with those. I didn't, I still have the 7D, the 7DII and now new the R7, so I could make the direct comparison. Even with the 7DII in EFCS I get a slight shutter slap that shows up when taking macro shots (which is where my focus lies predominantly now) and I am shooting a series of images in short succession because I am photographing when the wind has just died down and my subject hasn't still fully settled down (not knowing when the wind picks up again). I look forward to using the ES when the situation arises, I just need to assess if the image quality suffers due to the 12 bit A/D conversion in ES, compared to the 14 bit A/D conversion in EFCS/MS...

Not sure what others think about this.

https://photographylife.com/14-bit-vs-12-bit-raw

Excellent, and somewhat comforting article I have been a little concerned about this matter. Nice to see it actually be put to the test. Looks like 12 bit is not going to be a problem

I'm not struggling with the R7. I just would have preferred a smoother (for better words) shutter. Something like my R6II and my old R5 was.

Wishing for something better is a natural thing, getting it at the price point is another matter altogether, we all wanted to get the 1DxIII focusing system and the rugged build at the price point of the 7DII but we didn't get it. Realistic expectations go a long way to not get overzealous and in the end being disappointed about what is offered.

John Photo wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

Messier Object wrote:

Justme wrote:

I'll speculate in 1 to 1.5 years the R7 MK2 will be out.

I think Canon put out the R7 with less abled features to get the 1.6x crowd into mirrorless but will quickly upgrade it to the R7 MK2 in under 2 years.

That makes little sense when you consider the large number of 7D Mark II uses who waited years for a 7D Mark III and then waited some more years in anticipation of an R7 which would be a worthy successor in all respects - but in reality arguably fell short in a number of areas (buffer size,

The R7 buffer is much much larger than the 7DII buffer. This nonsense about the R7 having a smaller buffer than the 7DII is just plain silly.

where did I say it was smaller ?

"Fell short in a number of areas (buffer size)". I guess I'm just interpreting the words the way most people would. If you meant that the buffer fell short, despite being a lot bigger, you should have said so.

Anyway, some people have actually claimed that the R7 buffer is smaller than 7DII buffer.

It's only because Canon gives you the opportunity to shoot at 30fps that the buffer can fill up more quickly than the 7DII buffer. That doesn't make the buffer smaller. Giving you more options doesn't magically shrink the buffer.

with the R7 set for 30fps and the 7DII at 10fps both cameras hit their limit at just after 30 frames.

My 7DII would get 31 frames at 10fps. My R7 gets 39 frames at 30fps in full RAW. That's 3 times the shooting speed, 62.5% bigger files, and 26% more frames. That's a massive upgrade. The only way to pretend that it isn't is to be completely innumerate.

no, it's a minor upgrade given that the 7DII was released in 2014. And the fact that the buffer fills in 1/3 of the time clearly indicates this - yes its faster but fills more quickly

with the R7 at 15 fps it hits the limit after about 45 frames

Yes. That's 50% higher shooting speed, 62.5% bigger files, and 45% more frames. Again, a massive upgrade by any objective standards.

tiny upgrade given the E I G H T years between the two cameras.

Have a look at the R5's buffer compared to its predecessor from eight years ago - the 5DIII (end even the 5D4) and then you might understand what I'm talking about and why I feel that the R7 has fallen short of what I would expect we should have got with eight years between it and the 7D2

If you shoot at 15fps, still 50% faster than the 7DII's top speed, you can shoot for longer than with the 7DII.

No, it's still around 3 seconds - both cameras the same

True, but see above for what a massive upgrade this represents in terms of actual buffer size.

Three seconds is three seconds no matter how you try to spin it and then there's the lag while the camera writes to the SD.

One second or three seconds - how does that compare to the old Nikon D500. Back in the day many 7DII users were commenting on how much better the D500's buffer was and lamenting that Canon didn't have a match for it - but "by gosh when the 7DIII comes out we'll sure match and beat that Nikon D500" . . . eight years later and we still have the tiny buffer

Peter

IMO, that comparison makes no sense without also taking into account the file sizes, otherwise it is apples to oranges. And is there really a point in 40 fps? 30 fps? Who wants to look through a 30-40 images that are nearly the same, hoping one is "the one." It's a bit like throwing a bunch of spaghetti against a wall and hoping one noodle stuck. Sure, there may be an occasional exception, but rarely from a practical standpoint. if a shooter feels that 30-40 is actually needed very often, that might be a clue that it is the operator that needs to improve and not the gear/situation being the issue.

I certainly don't prefer to do any more that 12 or 15 fps, but I can tell you, there are certainly subjects that are so fast and twitchy, like Kinglets as an example, where 20 or 30, heck 40 fps would probably be an advantage. I just hope one doesn't leave it set for that the entire trip ! Or that is going to be some painful culling 😀 lol

BirdShooter7 wrote:

borgefjell wrote:

The Fuji X-H2s with stacked sensor might be the better overall package but Canon pretty much nailed it with the R7, especially price/performance seems to be really really good

I agree that Canon overall did a great job with the R7, it’s a camera that I enjoy using. It would have been really nice and I would have gladly paid more for a better viewfinder, faster sensor readout and bigger buffer based on my experience using the camera for the past 6+ months but the camera we got still is a great tool at an attractive price.

I agree. The other item I would like would be a quieter MS. I have tried the R7 and I love the size of the camera. I have not bought one, I might still, but I have a few things I don't like. The slow readout would prevent me from using the ES and the clicky MS sound would pretty much limit my usage to ECFS. Not really a big deal, but still limiting for the cost. While I do shoot some wildlife for fun, I am not sure I need a dedicated camera for wildlife.

I would like a second RF body. I am debating between the R7 the R8 or waiting until next year and see what the R5 II brings to the table. Or wait and see if Canon brings out a crop sensor camera with an advanced fast sensor.

BirdShooter7 wrote:

Chris Wolfgram wrote:

Zeee wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Putting more thought to this. The R7 is the first body since my 20D that when I tried the burst I said what heck is this. At first I thought it was broken. I don't have the 7D2 anymore to compare vibrations but I know I did not react the same way when I tried it for the first time.

Memory can be forgiving - but also you were used to the noise DSLR make. You now have had quite a few mirrorless and you are comparing with those. I didn't, I still have the 7D, the 7DII and now new the R7, so I could make the direct comparison. Even with the 7DII in EFCS I get a slight shutter slap that shows up when taking macro shots (which is where my focus lies predominantly now) and I am shooting a series of images in short succession because I am photographing when the wind has just died down and my subject hasn't still fully settled down (not knowing when the wind picks up again). I look forward to using the ES when the situation arises, I just need to assess if the image quality suffers due to the 12 bit A/D conversion in ES, compared to the 14 bit A/D conversion in EFCS/MS...

Not sure what others think about this.

https://photographylife.com/14-bit-vs-12-bit-raw

Excellent, and somewhat comforting article I have been a little concerned about this matter. Nice to see it actually be put to the test. Looks like 12 bit is not going to be a problem

I'm not struggling with the R7. I just would have preferred a smoother (for better words) shutter. Something like my R6II and my old R5 was.

Wishing for something better is a natural thing, getting it at the price point is another matter altogether, we all wanted to get the 1DxIII focusing system and the rugged build at the price point of the 7DII but we didn't get it. Realistic expectations go a long way to not get overzealous and in the end being disappointed about what is offered.

Agreed. This 12 vs 14 but thing has been made such a big deal of and in my personal testing I have come to similar conclusions as the article. Maybe if the sensors had more DR it could make a more noticeable difference?

Thanks for the additional information.