[BigMackCam]

DPR. who I've always perceived as being somewhat Canon-friendly, is not keen on either the R7 or R10, tho the R7 gets a bit more love. Still image quality is unimpressive on both according to them, as is the value proposition.

DPReview TV: Canon EOS R7 and R10 First Impressions Review: Digital Photography Review

If you're a long-time Canon fan, and looking for an APS-C to add to the mix, they seem like fine crop cameras if you already have glass to use with them. Like Pentax though, it looks like a harder sell attracting those already living in another ecosystem.

I kind of skip-watched that video, and I thought it was reasonably positive... did I miss something? Seems like the only real issues they mentioned were somewhat jittery hold on subject AF with lots of cover, non-stacked sensor / some rolling electronic shutter as a result, small buffer and lack of sensor shutter cover on the R10, and the current lack of dedicated APS-C lens choices. Image quality for the R7 is, allegedly, roughly what the EOS 90D provided - which seems about right to me. The images certainly look good from the video on my 24" QHD BenQ monitor. Of course, these are straight-from-camera JPEGs - the real test will be the raw files.

I'm not in the market for one of these... I'm not interested in switching from Pentax; but they seem like decent bodies, especially the R7. If you're a wildlife / sports shooter who already owns a full-frame Canon mirrorless and some nice glass, the R7 seems like a decent enough addition to the kit bag. I'm not sure about the R10, though... I really think they need some more APS-C glass to make that one more appealing.

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 05-27-2022 at 12:46 PM.

[KiloHotelphoto]

The M mount is like Pentax 645 right now. They work great but neither Canon or Pentax have done anything with them for years.

The M has been one of the best selling mirrorless mounts for years, I guess because of the size of them. I can’t see Canon discontinuing it anytime soon.

[reh321]

The M mount is like Pentax 645 right now. They work great but neither Canon or Pentax have done anything with them for years.

The M has been one of the best selling mirrorless mounts for years, I guess because of the size of them. I can’t see Canon discontinuing it anytime soon.

Will “EOS-R” lenses be usable on “EOS-R-S” cameras?
If so , I would guess the”EOS-M” mount, like the “EF”, EF-S” mounts, will last only so long.
Canon can support only so many mounts, and the more demand filled by “EOS-R” ….

[surfar]

Will “EOS-R” lenses be usable on “EOS-R-S” cameras?

Yes, and vice versa.

---------- Post added 05-28-22 at 09:10 AM ----------

From what I've seen so far these cameras are pretty "meh", especially the R10, which seems to be a traditional Canon lesson in "how cheap can we possibly make an ILC?"

Yes, that state of the art AF is very meh.To get close to it in Fuji is U$2499(announced on May 31st)

.Imagine the AF from a US5999 camera put into a body that costs less that U$1000

If you're a long-time Canon fan, and looking for an APS-C to add to the mix, they seem like fine crop cameras if you already have glass to use with them. Like Pentax though, it looks like a harder sell attracting those already living in another ecosystem.

Ya dont have to be a long or short time fan, just looking for what these new bodies offer.

Canon has redefined the crop genre with introducing affordable bodies with such high end capability.No other crop bodies come close at this point in time.

However, in a FUJ days the X-H2s is revealed at the U$2499 price.It may be better than the R7?

---------- Post added 05-28-22 at 09:17 AM ----------

if you already have glass to use with them.

The WR EF to RF adapter comes free.So,if any one who owns the 130million(plus 3rd party) lenses out there, can pay the body price and immediately shoot.

When ya consider that EF is the most adapted(to other mirrorless),then these bodies can appeal to those who dont shoot Canon.

[BigMackCam]

Canon has redefined the crop genre with introducing affordable bodies with such high end capability.No other crop bodies come close at this point in time.

I'd say that's very much a subjective view.

Sony's 2019-release A6600 isn't far off the R7 in many respects - slightly lower resolution at 24MP (not an especially meaningful difference), slower but still decent continuous shooting (too slow for bragging rights, fast enough for most purposes), less-advanced subject tailoring in AF - BUT, it has a BSI sensor, better battery life, and a much wider range of dedicated APS-C lenses in native mount (18 of them, I believe, though only four are primes). It's weather sealed to some extent, too. Here in the UK, it currently sells for GBP £1,249, body only. I know you don't like Sony, but a lot of folks do or have no strong leaning one way or the other.

Canon has released a couple of interesting cameras, here, but - for me, at least - they've hardly "redefined the crop genre" (that seems to be over-stating the case, somewhat). As @gatorguy suggests, Canon fans and/or existing full-frame RF-mount owners should find these new bodies - especially the R7, I think - quite compelling. For everyone else, they're simply nice evolutionary rather than revolutionary bodies that may or may not tick all the boxes depending on the individual photographer's needs...

---

I love this from Canon's marketing on the R7:

There’s even an OVF Assist mode that simulates the experience of an optical viewfinder – which uses HDR technology to reveal details in dark shadows and bright highlights – instead of previewing picture effects.

That just made me chuckle... I don't know why

[surfar]

I'd say that's very much a subjective view.

You can say that, its ok to be sceptical.

Sony's 2019-release A6600 isn't far off the R7 in many respects

Id say its old tech and Sony have stopped producing many of their current crop cameras and even FF ones.They are a distance behind in many respects.

BUT, it has a BSI sensor,

Thats of no consequence,Canons Digic X can do its magic in R7/10 with FSI.

Entry level and mid tier these bodies are placed at.Not a 7D mk2 replacement.That will come.Probably in 18 month to 2 years with Digic 11(in the R1 being announce Q4 this year).You get the Pictcha?

I know you don't like Sony,

Generally I dont.My old Sony phone just became unusable.it was good.

But I did buy a Sony late last year(or Santa gave it to me).Its a stacked sensor model and DOES the job.

[BigMackCam]

You can say that, its ok to be sceptical.

Thanks. It's the glowing rhetoric I'm sceptical of... not these new cameras.

Id say its old tech and Sony have stopped producing many of their crop cameras and even FF ones.They are a distance behind in many respects.

Fair enough, but precisely how does that affect the user's ability to take photos or the quality of output? How does the A6600's "old tech" hold back the photographer? I'm genuinely curious because I don't see how it does, and it's quite possible I'm missing something.

Sony have stopped producing many of their current crop cameras and even FF ones

They've announced certain older models have reached "end-of-line"... With other still-current models, they're no longer accepting orders where chip shortages are preventing production and affecting their ability to fulfil existing and future orders.

Thats of no consequence,Canons Digic X can do its magic in R7/10 with FSI.

Entry level and mid tier these bodies are placed at.Not a 7D mk2 replacement.That will come.Probably in 18 month to 2 years with Digic 11(in the R1 being announce Q4 this year).You get the Pictcha?

I'm not sure I do... So Digic X makes Canon's "old tech" FSI sensor "new tech"? What's the magic, exactly? I guess this is another way of asking the question above - new technology's all well and good, but how does a more recent Canon with its Digic X processor produce better images? Does it, in fact? I get that it results in somewhat faster performance, which is great on paper and wins "this camera vs that camera" spec-sheet face-offs - but how does that translate in terms of results? Does the 15fps mechanical shutter produce so many more keepers than, say, 10fps? 30fps electronic shutter is great except for when it isn't, due to rolling shutter which is clearly visible. Early image quality assessment suggests R7 images look broadly like those from an EOS 90D. Nothing wrong with that, IMHO... but I'm missing how Canon has "redefined the crop genre" - or is that coming with Digic 11?

To be clear, I'm not criticising Canon or its new cameras... They look just fine to me - but, as I said before, evolutionary rather than revolutionary. They seem to offer very good performance and features at (what we've been conditioned to accept nowadays as) accessible pricing for entry and mid-tier models. Per the DPR conclusions, they appear to be the mirrorless evolution of Rebel and EOS 90D cameras respectively...

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 05-28-2022 at 12:19 AM.

[surfar]

They've announced certain older models have reached "end-of-line".

Well,the models of crop/FF cameras I';m referring to are current models.A6100 is no more.A6600 and A7c,the production has been suspended.So if anyone want that 6600 you've suggested they could be lucky if they can find one.The suspension was announced 6 months ago.

but I'm missing how Canon has "redefined the crop genre"

Highest resolution...Fastest most accurate AF...fastest frame rates...Video capability beyond all the competition...all at a very reasonable price.

Now to you that may mean zilch, but watch these 2 bodies SELL!

[BigMackCam]

Highest resolution...Fastest most accurate AF...fastest frame rates...Video capability beyond all the competition...all at a very reasonable price.

Now to you that may mean zilch, but watch these 2 bodies SELL!

It doesn't mean zilch to me... It means a general - in some aspects significant, in others less so - evolution of what was previously available. It certainly doesn't mean an entire genre of cropped sensor photography redefined (you should get a job in marketing, or else stop drinking all that Kool Aid )... and I still don't understand (because you haven't explained it to me) how it translates into better results, or how much better, or what the "magic" is about Digic X and how it renders the "old tech" FSI-type sensor "new tech" in terms of image quality (which must really annoy the other brands who've been buying into BSI technology )...

I know they'll sell. I already said as much in previous posts

[surfar]

redefined

I cant make you drink the KoolAid,even though you have the bridle on.

[BigMackCam]

I cant make you drink the KoolAid,even though you have the bridle on.

Thanks. Rather than answers to the questions I asked, I have all I need to know from this ^^^ ...

[biz-engineer]

Thanks. No need to explain further... in the absence of answers to the questions I asked, I have all I need to know from this ^^^ ...

The answer(s) would be "law of diminishing returns". If you have no camera, getting a camera (any camera, even with a kit lens) gives you tremendous value because you can take pictures and even "artist" pictures, if the subject is compelling, the lighting is good, you could even print it on a nice paper frame it behind glass and hang it on the wall. Then, for every additional camera or lens you buy, and for every step in camera performance you buy, you get less value for your money. And since the highest performing digital cameras are far more expensive than the basic models, you get even less value for your money. So, you can do photography for $500, or $50 000, but when you upgrade from $500 to $50 000, you won't get $45 000 worth of better pictures, and if you print small or only sharing electronically, viewers may not even be able to tell the difference. If you have no camera, you buy a Canon R10 kit in 2022, it's great value. If you have already a 7DII or a 90D, buying a new Canon R10 gives you almost nothing for your money.

[BigMackCam]

The answer(s) would be "law of diminishing returns". If you have no camera, getting a camera (any camera, even with a kit lens) gives you tremendous value because you can take pictures and even "artist" pictures, if the subject is compelling, the lighting is good, you could even print it on a nice paper frame it behind glass and hang it on the wall. Then, for even additional lens you buy, and for every step in camera performance you buy, you get less value for your money. And since the highest performing digital cameras are far more expensive than the basic models, you get even less value for your money. So, you can do photography for $500, or $50 000, but when you upgrade from $500 to $50 000, you won't get $45 000 worth of better pictures, and if you print small or only sharing electronically, viewers may not even be able to tell the difference. If you have no camera, you buy a Canon R10 kit in 2022, it's great value. If you have already a 7DII or a 90D, buying a new Canon R10 gives you almost nothing for your money.

Thanks, biz. I'd heard Canon had somehow "redefined the crop genre", but it seems they've merely released a couple of nice, capable mirrorless cameras with some neat performance and features at pretty decent prices (considering what we've become used to in the last couple of years), balancing specs and build quality to do so, and they take great photos like any other recent camera whether APS-C or full-frame. Still, go Canon! Now they just need to get some more crop format glass released...

The response isn't entirely positive to the R7, even from within the Canon community (nice to see this doesn't just happen when Ricoh releases new Pentax gear). For example:

https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EOS-DSLR-Mirrorless-Cameras/EOS-R7/m-p/372886

It seems you can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all the people all of the time ... ever

Anyway, everyone can relax - the genre of crop photography hasn't changed... it continues as before, and previous gear - Canon or otherwise - remains just as relevant

[c.a.m]

Anyway, everyone can relax - the genre of crop photography hasn't changed... it continues as before, and previous gear - Canon or otherwise - remains just as relevant

Whew! For a moment there, I thought I'd have to sell all my Pentax gear and upgrade to a Canon R7. Thanks for the reality check!

I don't have any skin in this game, but I do follow new gear releases for technical interest and entertainment. Whenever a new camera is released, it seems that a collective frenzy ensues to compare A vs B, B vs C and A vs C. It's predictable: Some will claim that new sliced bread has just been invented and the game is on; others will lament the price or a missing feature; still others will diss one or another brand.

As others have said in this thread, an essential mark of a new product is how it might improve the results or outcomes of one's photography, including the enjoyment factor.

- Craig

[BigMackCam]

Whenever a new camera is released, it seems that a collective frenzy ensues to compare A vs B, B vs C and A vs C. It's predictable: Some will claim that new sliced bread has just been invented and the game is on; others will lament the price or a missing feature; still others will diss one or another brand.

Yeah, I find it a bit sad, really... Some camera is crowned King, then a year (or less) later, another camera is released that's somewhat "better" in a few ways (but not necessarily in ways meaningful to a large majority of photographers) and suddenly it's a "game changer", previous cameras are deemed "old tech", "nothing comes close" to the new camera, just watch it SELL!... yet the vast majority of photographers who clamour to buy it will be turning out much the same quality of photos. A minority might actually get a few more keepers over the course of a year's shooting, or very slightly better image quality when pixel-peeping that disappears after re-sizing for display or printing... but, you know, it's the best camera in its class, it wins the spec-sheet face-off, so that's all that matters

It's great that Canon have released these, and I'm sure they'll do well. I'm equally sure we'll have to check EXIF data to see which images were taken by them, because they won't look any different from photos taken with a 7DII, EOS 90D or any other fairly-recent APS-C camera. It'll be the photographer, as always, who makes the difference... both artistically and - with these increasingly complicated AF systems and other features - technically.

Given that most folks will avoid the electronic shutter with wildlife and sports (due to rolling shutter effect from the slower older-tech sensor), I wonder what the mechanical shutter life rating is? The EOS 90D was rated at 120,000 actuations. Assuming the R7 is similar, let's see... at 15fps, that's 120,0000 / 15 = 8,000 one second bursts = 133.33 minutes = 2.22 hours of continuous shooting

Just kidding, folks... just kidding