Kisaha

I remember Panasonic talking about 8K for the Tokyo Olympics, something that never realized. They did a lot of mistakes, like never delivered the C100mkII killer, or something between that and the GH5 with an m43 sensor. AF is getting more and more important for customers these days, and more and more young people are moving to better video cameras (better than their phones) that are not crazy about manual focus. For 40 somethings like me, manual focus was (still is) the standard in the industry, that changes right now. Also, there are too many options these days, even Canon offers the cheaper R7 which is about right for a group of people searching for a "cheap" hybrid solution. Fuji wasn't even very serious about video in their first mirrorless days and now they are going full on on moving images. They too need to strengthen their video mark with something like an C70 competitor, its good to have a good video hybrid, but some people want to see serious moves to fully invest on their system for video. GH6 is a video monster, but I am not sure if it will attract people from other systems, while the GH5 was almost alone at that price bracket 5 years ago. Even some GH5 users seem reluctant to invest on another GH camera, their GH5s (plural, not the GH5S) are just fine..

(The "quote" above is irrelevant). The Canon vND is terrible and very expensive. I bought the Meike one. The speed booster got mixed reviews and very expensive. I got the Viltrox one. These 2 adaptors are the biggest benefit of me adopting RF at the moment. I will be very reluctant with future upgrades..

Sony Japan, I must add.

Sony announced that these products will have an 8% price increase. a1 a9M2 a7SM3 a7C a7M4 a7M3 a6600 FE 12-24mm F2.8 GM FE 12-24mm F4 G FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm F4 ZA OSS FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6G OSS FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3G OSS FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS FE 14mm f/1.8 GM FE 24mm F1.4 GM FE 35mm f/1.4 GM FE 20mm f/1.8G FE 24mm F2.8G Distagon T* FE 35mm F1.4 ZA Sonnar T* FE 35mm F2.8 ZA FE 28mm F2 FE 35mm F1.8 FE 50mm F1.2 GM FE 40mm F2.5 G FE 50mm F2.5 G Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sonnar T* FE 55mm F1.8 ZA FE 85mm F1.4 GM FE 100mm F2.8 STF GM OSS FE 135mm f/1.8 GM FE 85mm F1.8 FE 90mm F2.8 Macro G OSS FE 50mm F2.8 Macro E 16-55mm F2.8G Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS E 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS LE E 16mm F2.8 E 20mm f/2.8 Sonnar T* E 24mm F1.8 ZA E 35mm F1.8 OSS E 50mm F1.8 OSS E 30mm F3.5 Macro FE PZ 16-35mm F4 G FE 400mm F2.8 GM OSS FE 600mm F4 GM OSS SELP18110G SELP18200 SELP18105G SEL14TC SEL20TC SEL057FEC SEL075UWC

Young at heart!

If you can't understand that zooms are built with a different purpose than primes, then there is no point in arguing. Noone ever said "I need an 70-200, so I am going to buy an 135mm". I can't make it more graphic for you. What I use professionally, and what I own, are two different things. You do not even know what I do in the industry! Another lame argument, and a cheap one also.

Samsung NX1 offered D.I.S since 2015, (and never overheated, ever...still can't believe that noone can't match that architecture yet) is only logical to improve on D.I.S on a lot smaller sensor. As of the whole concept, if someone is happy to create with a phone, then great. There are artistic/practical and technical ways to achieve great things with modern technology. There are options. If they put 4-5 amazing 1" cameras on a phone, I may burn all my cameras and lenses (and poison with toxic fumes my neighbors to death probably!). I can do with a 16mm/32mm/55 and 100mm..but the same darn good optical quality each..

@gt3rsman, noone is comparing primes with zooms, this is the unwritten rule since ever! Are you buying 130 primes to compare with the 70-200?! And when the prime at 138mm is better than the zoom you change lens while on action?! C'mon.. I understand and respect what you say (in your first post) but you are loosing gravitas with silly statements like these. It is funny that you bring back the 16mm, the only RF I own, obviously I did the right thing, but you do realize that "From a technical standpoint, the RF 16mm f/2.8 STM offers poor quality on a high megapixel camera. The broader center is perfectly sharp but the quality is falling apart in the corners. And that's with auto-correction. The lens is basically unusable in pure RAW mode with excessive barrel distortion, extreme vignetting and high lateral CAs. It's about as underdesigned as it gets and relies heavily on digital correction to lift it back from the imaging abyss. With auto-correction applied, there's only a mild amount of barrel distortions, the vignetting is low even at f/2.8 and the CAs have been killed off" (by Opticallimits) Its value as a lens increases because of its low value in money, not the exceptional optical performance of it.. I mean, this lens is great, because it is cheap, and make sense on a crop camera, plus small and light. Its lens hood costs 35€ by the way, on a 350€ lens.. I do agree they are missing the middle ground. Also you never commented on the advantages of speedboosters and vND adapters that the use of EF lenses offer. With those, you can have different focal lengths for an EF lens, plus the Holy Grail of run and gun videography, vND for whatever EF lens you put. This is something that burns me for years, as it was highly unpractical (for me) to change front NDs for all lens's changes or buy NDs for multiple lenses, or using step up/down rings.

Obviously a zoom lens is not comparable with a prime, that is the clearest of clear, and I also said already that I bought the 16mm because it seemed like the most suitable and unique proposition for the R7, so..yes.. I have the EF 70-200 4f, I shoot mainly 4-5.6f anyway - that is my style, and in no way I am changing that lens, having extra options with the speedbooster and the vND. I already commented on the ones I cared about. I know nothing about 300-400mm lenses, I have never used, or need, one, so I can't be helpful. I am tempted to grab one of the last 70-300 EF NANO, just because of the nano system, which is the best in Canonland. Also, the 18-135 EF-S NANO with the power zoom thingy, makes the R7 (with the vND adapter) an excellent dead cheap and small run n gun video camera, power zooming, vND and all. When most were using the 24-70mm with the Canon C100 cameras I always preferred for run and gun the cheap 18-135mm, a lot more options in my opinion, lighter, more versatile, so it's something I do. Even in the above quote about the 85mm the man preferred the Samyang! What else I can say? Non L lenses don't even have a lens hood (not only the inconvenience, the added price also)..that is utterly tragic..not even protected by the elements a bit, so you have to buy L for all the bells and whistles, no, we need options. Just a couple of rubber flanges for God's shake, not make them IP67.. You seem excited about your kit and buys, great, but most people I talk with are not. It is not surprising that Sony seems to be the leader right now, Canon has lost its edge, it is back on track, but lock everyone else out of the RF can only be bad for the customers, us. My next RF buy will probably be an A7iv competitor, and maybe the cheap 50mm, or any interesting RF-S. I need pancake primes, fisheye, small and light ultra wide zoom and a professional EF-S probably, lenses that will sell to the thousands, not to the few. I am not getting rid of my EF glass yet..right now it offers options.

Big improvement they are not, I got the 16mm RF because it was the only logical choice for the R7 (in terms of size/weight and price), and a unique proposition. Great lens it is not, and I did a little research on most of them. Obviously not many RF-S options. How many 1.2f lenses do you believe they sell every month? Or how many people are going to buy the 28-70mm 2f? The 35mm is a mixed bag, macro it is not. A part of the Abbott review about the 85mm 2f "I vastly prefer the autofocus performance of the Samyang to the RF85M, as it utilizes linear motors to achieve faster, quieter, smoother focus. The Samyang is also weather sealed, comes with a lens hood and a pouch, and has a slightly higher build quality in terms of external materials…not to mention that it has an aperture a full stop larger at F1.4. The big advantage for the Canon is in magnification, as the Samyang has a rather pathetic 0.11x magnification. But how about image quality? Comparing the two lenses at F2 (on the EOS R5) reveals that both are incredibly sharp and have excellent contrast, with perhaps a slight edge for the Samyang." They produce such excellent lenses that are affraid of Viltrox and Samyang ones! Imagine if they have to compete with Sigma, or other established lens makers.. They put I.S on some of the zooms..something that should have been there for years now and other manufacturers already have.. Selling a piece of plastic for a big proportion of the lens's price (for the cheap lenses at least) is a terrible business decision and shows a lot, and hoods are needed.

I have both the Meike vND and the Viltrox Speedbooster, plus the simple EF to RF Canon adapters and that move worries me a lot. I would be very sceptical about any firmware updates from now on. The Meike vND is by far better than the Canon one, and a lot cheaper also. I mean, ok, you sell something for gold Canon, at least make it worthy! Less options is also a bad thing for any system, less options make a system smaller, and Canon is not Canon of 2014. I believe Sony is making all the right moves lately and having more lenses options is one of those.

Canon is a lens's company..maybe RF is too new for them, but I hope they will change policy soon.

It seems like is the right one. That new "video" zoom is making it even more compelling. I thought hard about the whole situation. GH6 is an amazing video tool also, but now as good in photography, and the price difference is smaller, than say, the R7. Finally, I decided to go Canon again, after so many years and I will try to go full Canon in the next years to come. One aspect of my decision is of course the EF lenses I own (and m43 for the P4K). I am set on many levels with them and the occasional RF that I will buy. If you don't have any issues with owning different ecosystems, then I am sure you will be very happy with this combo. I believe that Fuji, finally arrived. If only they had a dedicated video camera (C70 antagonist) also.. ..but also, Canon has a lineup that can cover the most needs after a long long time..

Can you elaborate on that crop factor? How do you plan to use it and when? Also, did you have any issues editing those files? Where do you live?! (General place, not your address!)

As I mentioned above, the R7 is no C70, and the DGO sensor is THE THING in Canonland right now. I also said that with a similar sensor,the R7C (let's call it that), would be a 2.990-3.190$/€/£ machine, and that's that. The rolling shutter has been measured to something around 29ms if I remember right, which is almost double the GH6 number. It doesn't surprise me that a hybrid 1.650€ camera is not as good at video as a 5.950€ specialized video tool. @herein2020 maybe the RF 16mm would be a suitable gimbal lens? Small/super light/cheap/no need for an adapter and a good focal length (25.6mm equiv.) for gimbal work (at least for me, you maybe want more wide).

Ok, I got it now! They were only a couple left in Canon Greece (I doubt they will be more on shops as I searched on the usual suspects in the local market and they were none on stock), and it seems that it is discontinued, or something. I am sure Canon has a different priorities right now, than to spend valuable resources on such a specialized item. Well, the thing really works, it is a bit expensive at 159€ (don't remember the original price), it is very small and light, it does the obvious thing, power zooming, different speeds to the touch (depending the pressure you apply), 2 main speeds to start off (Slow/Fast) and that's it.. (Manual/Power zooming switch also). One additional plus is that I can hold the combo (camera/lens) a lot better now, it offers a base for my left arm and everything has improved. I am quite happy about this unexpected benefit, as it matches my holding style perfectly. The 18-135 nano is a bit front heavy (plus the adapter, that extends the center of weight of the lens further from the camera body) and I wasn't 100% happy with it. One of the reasons I do not like to use adapters in generala; But as I consider the RF-S 18-150mm I downgrade, from the ultra fast focusing EF-S lens, plus the ability to use vND adapters (and have a usable and dead cheap run n gun kit) made me keep the EF-S lens instead of the RF. Plus I have the PZ-E1 thingy now! The sound of the motor is not that prominent, but it is definitely audible from microphones on the camera (even external ones, but on the camera). The slower it goes, the more silent it is, and I guess it won't be an issue on a busy market in Bangkok, but obviously there is a little motor in there, there is no question about it! All in all, not a life-changing experience, but a nice thingy to have for the purposes I mentioned above, also, I can imitate various genres fast zoom-ins now, without any guilt!

I believe it has the 90D sensor, which is 3 years old (Canon says it is a new sensor, but I am not buying it, maybe a new processor) the C70 has the infamous S35 DGO sensor. R7 with the DGO sensor, now that would be something. Theoretically speaking, that camera could possibly cost double the R7 money, and that would be cheap.

The case studies are different, I wouldn't blame that much the camera though. It is a 1.499$ machine, I expect that much. And a bit overpriced as I mentioned before.. ..i also mentioned in my limited first hands review, the sensor is in its simplest form (non stacked/non BSI) and I wouldn't expect much. The camera works at the limits of its hardware, added with a little bit of old school Canon magic. I believe the "highlight rolloff" issue is exaggerated a bit but I would like to make a paid job with it first to make definite statements. To put things in perspective, it is a low cost camera (compared to other top RF cameras) and it performs a little better that the sum of its parts. That's it. No R5 or C70 killer, or whatnot..

Great review. As I have used mine only as a family camera so far, I can not add much. I will have to work on a real project with it to comment. Especially curious with the editibility™ of the video files. Just a couple of things. Agree with mostly everything you say so far except for ergonomics. Best camera ever made is Samsung NX1. Anyone that has hold that camera for more than 4 seconds, knows..same for the menu (Operating) system, maybe not as deep as the Canon one, but easy/plain and simple (unlike their smartphones's OS!). Why don't they put just another wheel at the back, like the one at the top?! So easy.. Mixed emotions for the joystick/wheel so far, it probably needs some knowing.. The off/photo/video dial is just terrible, the worst placed button/dial/wheel on the camera. I have accidentally turn it, in many and various occasions. Not good. I am still not sure why I need a special Video mode..I just want to press REC, and shoot..or press a simple button (a la NX) to have a video preview If I want to.. Turning dials is not my thing and Canon seems to like those in every camera they make (I dislike it on their video cameras too, waste of time, and a dial..). First pros I noticed were the battery life and the AF. Both are insane! I really like the small AF/M switch right and down at the front. Even better than the switch on the lenses. Cheap media, is a good way to keep the costs down in general. A V60 card can do wonders with this little camera. Some other "issues".. The software video tools as mentioned by @herein2020 and the lack of magnifying to check focus while recording. The viewfinder and screen seem sub par for the year 2022 (definitely I will stick a monitor for pro work). Quite honestly, it should be less than 1499€ (1650€ in Greece). Something around 1.350 maybe.. ..especially when sensor's tech isn't exactly cutting edge (non stucked, non BSI). Rolling shutter seems high, and easily I would exchange 2-4megapixels, for a stop or 2 better ISO performance for video (and less rolling shutter). the lack of meaningful RF-S lenses. I got the 16mm RF one (25-26mm equiv.) because 24mm is usually my favorite wide length, and I have used the 18-135mm EF-S Nano, which it is absolutely unbelievable quick in auto focusing, but a system to be successful has to have its own native lenses, and despite having 3 adapters (Meike vND, Viltrox speed booster, Canon plain one), that is very different than having native small and light ones. It's incredible what Sony is putting out there at the moment (2-3 more rumored APS-C lenses) lens wise, and they are probably going to hit hard the R7 and Fuji/GH6 with a new APS-C camera. All in all, except AF and battery life, this specific camera doesn't excel in much..but it seems to be the right camera, for a lot of people and situations, and - almost - an ok price..so, Canon at its best! If I could have a proper workhorse lens like the NX (again!) 16-50mm 2-2.8f, stabilized and all, a really wide zoom and a couple of APS-C pancake primes, that would be a great deal for me. For now is a specialized camera, but I do not doubt that a young fella somewhere will produce exciting art or document really important stuff with this, even earn serious money. Definitely is not the joke that the a6XXX series is; it ticks most boxes and is a clever way for Canon to introduce customers to the RF line of camera and lenses. Is almost a steep price for an "introduction", or a "demo" item, but there will be plenty to pay for it.

A few years ago I did a camera job for an auto/moto TV show. We were using GH5 cameras. I had to "fight" with the director to use a tripod for some of the static car shots! And he is almost 65 years old..not some young guy that doesn't know any better.. A tripod shot, is a tripod shot. IBIS is not. I see a trend with various trends in the industry. First we had the 5D full frame look (in some projects it was hardly anything in focus). Then we had the GoPros, the directors wanted 2 to 3 of those in each project..then we had drones, I know documentaries that were using drone shots (Phantom2) instead of tripod shots..then IBIS, some directors didn't even want any tripods on set. Now there is a trend with AF on set (especially with C300mkii cameras). I have never used AF on any project in my life, that is why I got the R7, to see what's what. It is a language that has evolved for more than 100 years now, everything has its place but the basics have been set decades ago, when there was no ibis, no log, no AF, no full frame! The old school stuff is almost 90% of that language in my opinion.

No, I just wasn't using the lens at all since the pandemic. I was thinking about it the other day though. If I could find a cheap one I may be tempted.

This guy is posting a lot of info about the R7. I am amazed by the AF so far, its insane with the 18-135 EF-S nano. https://youtu.be/Js8lbVJtFOA

Big fun of both (mostly Transformers), still get a couple of those per year (mostly Transformers!).

Like the R7 for 1000 less euros! The AF is insane in this little camera and I have 3 adapters already. Normal Canon EF to RF, vND Meike and Viltrox 0.71X. In a way, it offers more options than a full frame one. I haven't tested the Viltrox one yet though. The other 2 are working amazingly.

ΝΧ500 with the pancakes is miniscule. 28mgpxls. I have the 45mm for portraits and the 30mm pancake as a starting point. Sometimes I bring the 16-50PZ with me as an all arounder (tiny..).the camera is inside a faux-leather case, and the one extra lens and battery just fit on my general use bag(no extra camera bag. I just throw the camera in, and the lens/battery on a small pocket). I am getting both the R7 and the NX500 next week with me!