Equipment advice please - Canon R6 or R7?

whyone

whyone

Messages
798
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
Morning all,

I wasn't sure whether to post this here or 'Equipment' but as my primary interest is wildlife, and here is where that expertise lies, I've plumped for here...hope this is OK?

Anyway, enough waffle, my question regards a switch from Canon DSLR - mirrorless.

My main wildlife lens is, and will remain for the foreseeable future, a Canon EF 100-400 f4,5-f5,6L IS II USM.

I am struggling to decide whether to go for an R6 or R7 body. I would greatly appreciate peoples thoughts on the pro's and cons of going for an R6, and using a 1.4 III converter on the occasions that I need more reach, or the R7 with the APS-C sensor and extra reach (but at what cost WRT image quality?) as standard!

Thank you kindly.

​

 
Converters are an absolutely last resort option and in fact there are opinions that cropping is just as or more effective. You had a big prime then maybe, slow zoom is a very different story.
R6 has good sensor but likely not optimal for your line work. No top LCD is well pretty cheap!

I think I would always prefer full frame to any crop body, which only gets equal if you need to crop heavily. But I don't like idea or overheating and unstable r5 design particularly considering the money they charge for it

As you can tell I don't like anything they've made after 5div
 
Thanks for your thoughts - interesting!!!

Especially as I currently use a 5Div and a 5Diii! (I'd be keeping the 5Div)

My inclination is to stay full frame (its what I'm used too) but heading to Pantanal next year where I think I'll need that extra reach...
 
I wasn't aware of this overheating issue.....but a quick glance at the interweb suggests to me that this is a problem when shooting video - is this correct? If so, this is something I have never done and have no intention of starting anytime soon so whilst disappointing that Canon have stuffed this up, it wouldn't impact my intended use for the camera.
 
Hi Andrew and thanks!

General consensus is that the R7 is certainly very good up to ISO 6400....currently I rarely stray beyond 1000.
 
andrewc said:
If its just for wildlife, then in terms of pixel density, the R7 trumps both the R6 (almost over 4x) and R5 (almost 2x). Can it handle high ISO though?
Click to expand...
For pixel density, the R7 is certainly the winner. For wildlife I think it's a fight between the R5 and R7 - the sensor size of the R6 doesn't give much leeway for cropping.
I'm waiting for my R7 to arrive at some point to replace a 7D ii so already have crop sensor lenses. If you are keeping your 5Div I'd go with with the R7 - it's cheaper than the other options and effectively has the 1.6 extension built in

For iso performance you may be interested in this review
View: https://youtu.be/-8CUHjK2dA8
 
i would try to compare iso performance, Canon are legendary for making APS-C sensors that have terrible iso performance so i would be wary of buying an r7
 
fujilover said:
i would try to compare iso performance, Canon are legendary for making APS-C sensors that have terrible iso performance so i would be wary of buying an r7
Click to expand...

I can’t say I agree with that view. Not as good as FF but not terrible and modern software helps.
 
I have the R5 and it great for wildlife with 100-400m2 with and without tc, mainly due to the much improved AF over the dslrs. Cant comment on R7.
 
Well this is a debate many of us 7Dii owners have had for a while now !

I have a R7 on order and if a cheap R6 appeared in the members section I would buy, however I would always be envious of R5 owners. As the Eye / object detect is very, very good and 45mp is pretty damn good for a lot of different areas of photography ! !

An R7 with 100-400L Mkii will be a very good combination for wildlife and sports.
The R6 for me I would use for landscape and portraits being its big appeal, IMO !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top