CANON EOS R7 Real World AF REVIEW: Just As Good As R3 R5 R6?!

FROPACK3 is HERE with 15 all-new custom Lightroom presets!!! Check it out

I took the Canon EOS R7 out into the Real World to Review it's Auto Focus. I went to a Philadelphia Phillies and Union game. I used the kit 18-150 RFs, Canon 70-200 2.8 RF and 400 2.8 RF. How did the Auto Focus hold up and is it as good as the R3, R5 and R6??? How's it feel in comparison to something like the Nikon Z9?

Want to send us gifts, swag, letters...here's our P.O. BOX
PO Box 3715 Philadelphia, PA 19125

Gear I USE
My Go To Mirrorless Camera for Stills
Our go to Cameras for Recording Videos at FroKnowsPhoto

Follow me

Please help us continue to make FREE content
by purchasing one or all of the FroKnowsPhoto
Educational guides. To check out previews of
each guide click here.

#FroKnowsPhoto #JaredPolin #photography

[froknowsphoto]

I mentioned SUB $2, 000 camera in the video, when in fact, the body only is $1500. I was looking at the kit when I made the sub $2, 000 statement. So this camera in fact is only $1, 500 which is insane for what it offers.

[timothyrat]

I had a 7D mark II and if I hadn't already touched an R5, I would be in heaven with the R7. Just having autofocus, EVF, and rotating touch screen. Incredible camera for $1500. I think for anyone who has been holding onto a 7D mark II and wants to get into mirrorless (and can't afford the R5 or R6 or doesn't want full frame), will not be disappointed. Just keep in mind that for bird photography, beware shooting birds in flight in electronic shutter mode. It really warps the background and their wings.

[matthewhigbee]

Just rented and shot with the R7. This is one I will be buying. The buffer fills quickly but it is manageable. I used the RF 100-500mm with it and that gave me a lot of reach on the long end acting like a 800mm f11. No problems with run and gun wildlife shooting and even with the smaller equivalent aperture I could still get decent subject separation. Found minimal difference in weight and similar size to the R5 (no grip). Took me a minute to figure out the controls and set up back-button focus but very usable. Body only for $1500 makes it a deal and a great second camera body.

[chasingmanhattan]

I picked up an R7 a couple months ago and after two weddings, a running track shoot, and a few model sessions I can say that I love shooting with it. I’d love to see how this camera pairs with canon’s sharpest prime glass given that it’s resolving north of 80mp on a full frame basis. Thinking of making a 1.2 purchase to bring out the full potential of the sensor.

[jhenry]

Received my R7 June 24, body only and not having a battery grip like my 7DMk2 doesn't even bother me. The auto focus system and how efficient it can communicate and transfer photos to my smart phone is something that I very happy with and my capture rate is much higher shooting birds in flight. I paired with the RF800 f/11 and the reach is insane.

[mike.k]

Canon! People needs new RF-S glass! Just body is not enough! And not everyone has like 3.000$ for RF full frame L lens! Needs affordable 1.4 or 1.8 prime lenses as well as good zooms!

[cathco]

A very fair and honest review. I've been using my R7 since the release date. I've keep seeing the camera compared to the R5 which is really apples to oranges for the reasons you mentioned. For $1500, the R7 is a good camera. Thanks Jared!

[Adam-qsir]

Been researching this camera for my step up purchase. I mainly do landscape and wildlife, but your video told me more useful info than I have seen on other channels. Sports and many wildlife shooting scenarios are similar with the speed and sometimes erratic motion. Very helpful information. Thank you.

[JuanSanchez-zzme]

I'm a nikon fan boy

But when the d500 came out, with af on par with the d5, no one got mad that a crop sensor enthusiasts body had comparable af to the 6500 dollar body.

I'm not mad that the r7 is being compared to the Z9 af wise. If anything, hopefully it'll push nikon to have the same af on future lower end bodies

[Hodenkat]

As an R7 owner I'm happy with the performance Canon was able to give me at this price point. It's actually kind of amazing how good it is for the money. Not being a professional photographer, I struggle with the high cost of the RF glass that I would like to have so I look forward to other makers possibly producing RF mount lenses in the future. Full frame with this level of autofocus isn't in my future either, so this will be a long-term keeper for me. Great test review. I think the R7 held up pretty well!

[HessiDude]

I agree with you on removing noise with traditional software. It detracts from the image rather than making images better. But after seeing what something like topazlabs’ denoise and sharpen can do I’ve jumped ship.

[jeffolson]

I have had the R7 for two weeks now. I use it for wildlife with a Sigma 150-600C lens and I have found the autofocus to be shockingly good. My keeper rate is much higher now. I have "tested" the limits so I have attempted shots I would normally not even try. Some work, some don't, but that is how you figure out what the camera will do. I have even shot at ISOs up to 20, 000, yes, they were noisy.

I have found the battery life to be good. At 1570 images the battery still shows 2 bars.

[simonmaduxx]

For Lightroom users worried about the sharpness from the results of these r7 photos, here is something to note. I'm a pixel peeping monster, editing over 20k photos over past few years..so I do a ton of comparisons between the six or so canon bodies that I have.

Those that are very very very familiar with Lightroom would have noticed that the sharpness default amount was tuned up or maybe around Lightroom 6, but definitely for cc/classic.

The old standard was 25, the new standard is 40. The issue is that having your default sharpness this high definitely makes pictures look a lot better especially on newer monitors like apples laptops etc. At the same time, it also increases the noise visibility, especially in clear skies and shadows.

For the purpose of accurate focus comparisons between new camera files and older files - when I adopted LR classic to replace my version 5.4, I made a custom import preset that only reverts the sharpness back to the old 25. With that sharpness level now being even between my newer Canon files and my older ones, I can do a more accurate review in terms of the image quality.

If this doesn't sound like it makes a big deal to you, that's fine. But again the higher that sharpness setting is, the more noise you're going to see. The r7 uses the same overburdened sensor as the 32 MP sensor in a m62. The pixel smearing will reduce your overall sharpness (google it). That said, the higher default sharpness for Lightroom will cover up for it but your shadows and skies are going to look way worse.

Again those very familiar with Lightroom will understand exactly what I'm talking about. Others who never paid attention and just defaulted to whatever Lightroom does this is probably not useful info for you.

The main reason I bring this up is because I downloaded Jared's first round of test images and they were terrible in terms of sharpness and focus accuracy. I was super disappointed to see no change in image quality at all for 22 2022 Canon crop. (colors are worse also). They are using the old sensor Tech and so even with great glass, the pictures are going to look the same as older Canon crop cameras.

Just like you guys I have been looking to upgrade from my M bodies, and once again Canon does half steps leaving me as a frustrated customer who really wants to upgrade his gear but sees no real progress in image quality. Hopefully this information is useful to you. Cheers.

[martinlee]

Although I shoot with Nikon, always enjoy seeing what’s available with your excellent, informative reviews.
I believe you do an excellent job at showing what you can do with the ‘entry level’ bodies. YoFro!!

[MonroesArtStudio]

I don't think I've ever really shot over 2k ISO and honestly everything you showed at "high" ISO is perfectly usable. I am jazzed about this R7. Can't wait to get my chance

[Gremlack]

I am tempted by this camera.
I hope they come out with something like an rp2, or r2, that are on par with the speed of the r7 and r10, as they seem to be moving to letting their slightly lower level cameras also have pretty good specs and speed.

[budthecyborg]

I have to wonder if the only reason they didn't put a stacked sensor in this was just to protect the value of the R3.
One of the main advantages of APS-C is the sensors are cheap to make, so making a stacked sensor R7 would cost a lot less than the R3 sensor.
No doubt everyone would be a lot happier with the R7 if it were stacked sensor at $2, 000 but then Canon would probably sell half as many R3s.

[johngonzales]

i'm glad canon treats great af as a standard not a luxury

[Photographer]

You're always extremely entertaining as well as knowledgeable! Great revire for the R7. So very happy you're in the Philadelphia area also! You're the best that Philly has to offer!!

[paramounttechnicalconsulti]

R7 and R10. Started with an AE-1, which was a mule! Drop it in mud, rain, hurricane, desert heat - it still works 40 year later! Finally moved to digital with a couple of EOS Rebels: much less than a year of life; forget "Rain", a drizzle or humidity abovwe sent them to the great beyond. I then learned the new planned-obsolescence term "weather sealing" the hard way. It was hard to wrap my mind around the fact that a camera company would make a camera that I was supposed to know that under NO CIRCUMSTANCES could I ever take it out of the box or (gasp!!!) take it outside!
Here is what I really want to knwo about the R-"crooked numbers" series. Did on drop of sweat fall uopn it? Did you take any pictures outside the Zero-Humidity of Death Valley? Was there a single water unbound molecule within a square mile? If so, did it immediately go wonky and have to be sent to the North Pole for repair?