Canon R7 and Autofocusing Performance

Honestly YouTube is your friend here - there is a ton of content on the R7 for birds and wildlife. Duade Paton is where I'd start, but you'll have lots of other content suggested from there.

Generally, the R7 does very well - it inherits the R3 system which in theory is better than what is currently in the R5.  Recognition and tracking work well.  BUT it's not perfect, and there are annoyances. In particular

a) it has a greater tendency to lose the bird and jump to the background. this is likely due to slower readout of the R7 vs the R3 or R5. Dual BBF can help mitigate this by setting up both tracking modes and spot modes to allow you to manually re-focus on the bird and go back to tracking.

b) behavior with 3rd party lenses seems to be variable, although this seems to be a broad problem with R bodies, not just the R7. Lenses like the Sigma 150-600 exhibit fluttering or pulsing which impacts performance. The R7 seems to actually be better than the R6II for example.

I've never used the 7DII, but my impression is that despite the variability most feel that the R7 is a big step up from the 7DII in terms of performance and keeper rate.

While it is not a full replacement for the 7D2, it does a lot more and better in many areas. It lacks the large build that some like, and a built in flash. I have been using the 7D2 since release and got the R7 on launch day and haven’t used my 7D2 since.

AF wise it really is superb. It does take a bit of adjustment though. On my 7D2 the go to AF mode was centre point plus 8 surround support points. On the R7 for a lot of my shooting I just use animal eye detect and all the points. It works very well most of the time that I rarely need to switch. I have tracked insects in flight like small hover flies, dragons and many birds. It is not infallible though and it takes time to learn where it fails. I use back button focus so I can switch to single point AF on those rare occasions I need it. Generally though, it is a very good performer.

It lacks buffer, but if I shoot CRAW and at 15fps that is not an issue. Rolling shutter is the biggest issue on the R7, but only in full ES mode and I still get an acceptable hit rate.,Again,,you soon learn when to switch to ECFS.

Kenny08 wrote:

I'm going back to Canon realm after years of frustration waiting for Nikon to catch up on things, so here I am back on the boat.

I know the R5 is best for wildlife, but given that I mainly photograph wildlife, I prefer a crop sensor.

I understand as I believe is to be correct the R7 is a replacement for the 7DMark II?

I'm reaching out here to determine if the R7 is in fact adequate enough for photographing fast moving objects in terms of tracking and autofocus.

Thanks

Hi Kenny,

Welcome to the EOS R Talk Forum - and to the Canon R System (probably! ).

Great commentary and advice from the forum as usual.

We have the R5 and R7 (previously the 5DIV and 7DII - both now traded), but only shoot wildlife on a 'casual/ as we come across things' basis - mainly zoos and on walks/ hikes.

As others have said, the R7 isn't perfect (nor are we!), but the AF is from another universe.

The R5 and R7 both do very well with wildlife, but the extra reach of the R7 is magical - and it has certain AF functionality not available to the older R5 (though we await a f/w update!).

Just to add to the thread, some examples below (screen capture limitations apply) -

R7 raw showing focus point...

R7 raw showing focus point...

R7 raw showing focus point...

R7 raw showing focus point...

R7 + EF-RF Adapter + EF 100-400L II (left)/ R5 + RF 100-500L (right)

(Note - Comparison shots processed).

I recently replaced my 7DII with the R7, I don't see myself going back to DSLR unless I get a cheap 1DxIII because the R7 outperforms the 8 year 7DII in all relevant areas by a huge margin. The only thing I still need to get to grips with is that I have to close my left eye when looking through the EVF (that is an old habit of mine because I was looking for things outside the viewfinder view that may influence the behaviour of my subject, like other birds in the flight path or trees or....). For all intents and purposes the R7 replaces the 7DII except for weather sealing and camera body size. The new thumb wheel position requires some adjusting to but for me it is even more comfortable than the position it had from the 10D onwards...

charlyw64 wrote:

I recently replaced my 7DII with the R7, I don't see myself going back to DSLR unless I get a cheap 1DxIII because the R7 outperforms the 8 year 7DII in all relevant areas by a huge margin. The only thing I still need to get to grips with is that I have to close my left eye when looking through the EVF (that is an old habit of mine because I was looking for things outside the viewfinder view that may influence the behaviour of my subject, like other birds in the flight path or trees or....). For all intents and purposes the R7 replaces the 7DII except for weather sealing and camera body size. The new thumb wheel position requires some adjusting to but for me it is even more comfortable than the position it had from the 10D onwards...

l'm familiar with the performance of the 7DII - how do you find the overall performance of the R7.  Is the EVF blackout enough to create a problem for rapid firing of the shutter?

Steven Aunan wrote:

Kenny08 wrote:

I understand as I believe is to be correct the R7 is a replacement for the 7DMark II?

I moved from the 7DII to the R7. The video below explains why the R7 is not a "replacement." There is no battery grip, and it lacks some of the "pro" features of the 7DII. The price is fantastic, though, and that's why I bought it.

I'm reaching out here to determine if the R7 is in fact adequate enough for photographing fast moving objects in terms of tracking and autofocus.

Yes, the R7's AF system is fantastic for wildlife. It requires some specific settings to reach its top performance, and my understanding is that the R6II's AF system is better, but you can't beat the R7 at its price point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aT1TFLPgHK0

Thanks Steven - but the R7's autofocus in theory shouldn't be be at the same level as an R5 correct?

I think the price of the R7 is well fitted - would be nice to have an R5, I rather spend the extra savings on a telephoto lens.

Thanks for the welcome! It's good to be back in the Canon realm of photography - I shouldn't have in the first place. I don't want to go on a bashing thread here, but it's been very disappointing being in the Nikon boat for the past few years - they are slow in development, and to the point of watching molasses drip from a spoon. They have many on the fence with their 200-600mm zoom lens announced more than 4 years ago, and to this day, still no indication if it's being released or even real.

I am not surprised that they continue to fall behind.

Anyhow, back to the original thread - that's great to hear about your feedback on the R7.  Since you have the R5, I'm assuming you've been able to have some comparison between the 2 camera bodies as it relates to autofocusing.  Is the R7 on par, or close to the R5 in terms of tracking and AF?

Kenny08 wrote:

Thanks for the welcome! It's good to be back in the Canon realm of photography - I shouldn't have in the first place. I don't want to go on a bashing thread here, but it's been very disappointing being in the Nikon boat for the past few years - they are slow in development, and to the point of watching molasses drip from a spoon. They have many on the fence with their 200-600mm zoom lens announced more than 4 years ago, and to this day, still no indication if it's being released or even real.

I am not surprised that they continue to fall behind.

Anyhow, back to the original thread - that's great to hear about your feedback on the R7. Since you have the R5, I'm assuming you've been able to have some comparison between the 2 camera bodies as it relates to autofocusing. Is the R7 on par, or close to the R5 in terms of tracking and AF?

Hi Kenny,

In my experience - my camera is the R5, but I set up Karen’s R7 and, as it’s a relatively new acquisition, I’m having to ‘test’ any changes (frequently  ) - they are very well matched for AF - sometimes the R5 locks on quicker/ tracks better and nails the shot, sometimes the R7 does.  The R7 is most definitely not a poor relation when it comes to AF performance.

We shoot raw.  The raw files from the R5 tend to hold together better once the ISO climbs (6400+) but the R7’s raw files are surprisingly good.  You can crop from either camera to a staging degree (but the R7 is already closer to start with).

Phil

PMUK wrote:

Kenny08 wrote:

Thanks for the welcome! It's good to be back in the Canon realm of photography - I shouldn't have in the first place. I don't want to go on a bashing thread here, but it's been very disappointing being in the Nikon boat for the past few years - they are slow in development, and to the point of watching molasses drip from a spoon. They have many on the fence with their 200-600mm zoom lens announced more than 4 years ago, and to this day, still no indication if it's being released or even real.

I am not surprised that they continue to fall behind.

Anyhow, back to the original thread - that's great to hear about your feedback on the R7. Since you have the R5, I'm assuming you've been able to have some comparison between the 2 camera bodies as it relates to autofocusing. Is the R7 on par, or close to the R5 in terms of tracking and AF?

Hi Kenny,

In my experience - my camera is the R5, but I set up Karen’s R7 and, as it’s a relatively new acquisition, I’m having to ‘test’ any changes (frequently ) - they are very well matched for AF - sometimes the R5 locks on quicker/ tracks better and nails the shot, sometimes the R7 does. The R7 is most definitely not a poor relation when it comes to AF performance.

We shoot raw. The raw files from the R5 tend to hold together better once the ISO climbs (6400+) but the R7’s raw files are surprisingly good. You can crop from either camera to a staging degree (but the R7 is already closer to start with).

Phil

I found what the R7 gains in software updates the R5 seems to match in its extra speed, at least in part. TBH, AF is so good in all the new Rx bodies that it is hard to differentiate on that element,

Kenny08 wrote:

charlyw64 wrote:

I recently replaced my 7DII with the R7, I don't see myself going back to DSLR unless I get a cheap 1DxIII because the R7 outperforms the 8 year 7DII in all relevant areas by a huge margin. The only thing I still need to get to grips with is that I have to close my left eye when looking through the EVF (that is an old habit of mine because I was looking for things outside the viewfinder view that may influence the behaviour of my subject, like other birds in the flight path or trees or....). For all intents and purposes the R7 replaces the 7DII except for weather sealing and camera body size. The new thumb wheel position requires some adjusting to but for me it is even more comfortable than the position it had from the 10D onwards...

l'm familiar with the performance of the 7DII - how do you find the overall performance of the R7. Is the EVF blackout enough to create a problem for rapid firing of the shutter?

At 15 fps the blackout is significantly shorter, at 30 fps there is none (although that uses electronic shutter and incurs the rolling shutter wrath), you may have to adjust to the way the EVF handles that, because it no longer is a traditional blackout (in most modes)...

The performance of the R7 runs rings around the 7DII, especially in autofocus performance - the buffer is about the same (in terms of time you can keep the shutter depressed before the buffer space is exhausted) if you can bring yourself to use CRAW instead of RAW and fast cards (UHS-II V60 seem to be a good break even between price and performance, like the Sony Tough M or PNY V60). CRAW drawbacks are minute, for me previously I wouldn't use anything beyond ISO 1600 on the 7DII, 6400 is about the limit on the R7 currently (may be extended to 12800 when I get more comfortable with processing the 32 Mp images)...

Kenny08 wrote:

Steven Aunan wrote:

Kenny08 wrote:

I understand as I believe is to be correct the R7 is a replacement for the 7DMark II?

I moved from the 7DII to the R7. The video below explains why the R7 is not a "replacement." There is no battery grip, and it lacks some of the "pro" features of the 7DII. The price is fantastic, though, and that's why I bought it.

I'm reaching out here to determine if the R7 is in fact adequate enough for photographing fast moving objects in terms of tracking and autofocus.

Yes, the R7's AF system is fantastic for wildlife. It requires some specific settings to reach its top performance, and my understanding is that the R6II's AF system is better, but you can't beat the R7 at its price point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aT1TFLPgHK0

Thanks Steven - but the R7's autofocus in theory shouldn't be be at the same level as an R5 correct?

I think the price of the R7 is well fitted - would be nice to have an R5, I rather spend the extra savings on a telephoto lens.

I use both the R5 and R7 pretty regularly and in my opinion the R7 is actually better in terms of flying birds and such.

Distinctly Average wrote:

PMUK wrote:

Kenny08 wrote:

Thanks for the welcome! It's good to be back in the Canon realm of photography - I shouldn't have in the first place. I don't want to go on a bashing thread here, but it's been very disappointing being in the Nikon boat for the past few years - they are slow in development, and to the point of watching molasses drip from a spoon. They have many on the fence with their 200-600mm zoom lens announced more than 4 years ago, and to this day, still no indication if it's being released or even real.

I am not surprised that they continue to fall behind.

Anyhow, back to the original thread - that's great to hear about your feedback on the R7. Since you have the R5, I'm assuming you've been able to have some comparison between the 2 camera bodies as it relates to autofocusing. Is the R7 on par, or close to the R5 in terms of tracking and AF?

Hi Kenny,

In my experience - my camera is the R5, but I set up Karen’s R7 and, as it’s a relatively new acquisition, I’m having to ‘test’ any changes (frequently ) - they are very well matched for AF - sometimes the R5 locks on quicker/ tracks better and nails the shot, sometimes the R7 does. The R7 is most definitely not a poor relation when it comes to AF performance.

We shoot raw. The raw files from the R5 tend to hold together better once the ISO climbs (6400+) but the R7’s raw files are surprisingly good. You can crop from either camera to a staging degree (but the R7 is already closer to start with).

Phil

I found what the R7 gains in software updates the R5 seems to match in its extra speed, at least in part. TBH, AF is so good in all the new Rx bodies that it is hard to differentiate on that element,

Agreed, the R5 and R7 are so close in AF - both being an absolute joy to use.

(I should also clarify that, while I do all the setting up and post processing, Karen is more of a photographer than I will ever be - no tech/ upgrades will ever resolve that fundamental).

Phil

Kenny08 wrote:

l'm familiar with the performance of the 7DII - how do you find the overall performance of the R7. Is the EVF blackout enough to create a problem for rapid firing of the shutter?

Any EVF blackout/lag is not enough to create a problem, even when shooting 15fps. Most of my lenses don't support the full frame rate with the electronic shutter, so I can't comment on that. In mechanical shutter or electronic first curtain shutter the R7 will shoot 15fps vs. 10fps on the 7DII. I usually shoot CRAW + jpeg and rarely have problems with the buffer size. Like the 7DII it's fine as long as you don't lay on the shutter button for extended periods. The AF on the R7 seems to be faster and more accurate than on the 7DII. The subject/eye tracking works great for isolated subjects, but can jump all over the place for busy subjects like a basketball game. In those cases I just use the center AF point with the 4 surrounding points. I've been using an R7, 7D II, and 5D III for basketball this season and am planning to sell the 7D II because the AF just isn't as good as the other two cameras. The R7 files seem to have a sharpness and nice colors that it noticeably better than the 7DII. The only thing I really don't like about the R7 is the lack of a vertical grip. For times when I'm shooting a lot of vertical photos it can get rather awkward and tiring without a vertical grip.

Kenny08 wrote:

I'm going back to Canon realm after years of frustration waiting for Nikon to catch up on things, so here I am back on the boat.

I know the R5 is best for wildlife, but given that I mainly photograph wildlife, I prefer a crop sensor.

I understand as I believe is to be correct the R7 is a replacement for the 7DMark II?

I'm reaching out here to determine if the R7 is in fact adequate enough for photographing fast moving objects in terms of tracking and autofocus.

That depends on the lens and the ambient light (as well as the contrast of the subject).  The R7 has the hardest time seeing AF in low light out of all the recent Canon R-series bodies, but the R7 is also giving far more pixels-on-subject with the same lens, so if you decide that the light is too poor for the R7 to focus quickly then you could also use a faster, shorter lens or remove a TC to get adequate focus speed and just save the "pixels on subject" feature for when light is better.

My impression with the R5 and R7 is that with the same subject, poor lighting, and optics is that the R5 acquires focus faster, but if you put a 1.4x TC on the R5 to get the same pixels-on-subject as the R7, then the R5 AF is a little bit slower than the R7 AF.