Looking Back at Canon After 18 Months

Canon R7, EF-S 10-18 IS STM

After 18 months with Canon RF, what's my take on the system.

First off, if you are looking to get into FF mirrorless and cannot afford high-end glass or bodies, a used R6 or new R8 and Canon's consumer lens lineup is hands down the most complete offering available under $2K USD. Both Nikon and Sony offer mixed bags of body/lens selection while Canon not only has reasonably-priced zooms from 15 through 400mm including both super-zoom offerings, a super-compact kit zoom (24-50) and a normal kit zoom that's actually pretty good (24-105), and well-featured bodies. Only Canon offers a fully rounded consumer lens lineup for FF mirrorless, which is ironic since they also need it the least as they had that in EF mount and EF adapts very well to RF. 

Nikon simply doesn't have anything zoom-wise except 1 super-compact offering (also a 24-50) and several super-zooms (notably a 24-200 and a 28-400), but no inexpensive UWA zoom, no inexpensive mid-range zoom and the only inexpensive telezoom option is a Tamron (70-300). 

Sony has the better filled lens lineup, but their general mid-range zoom (28-70 OSS) is not nearly as good as the Canon 24-105 STM (shorter range, optically inferior), still relies on a Tamron option for that inexpensive telezoom and the UWA option really relies on finding an old ZA 16-35/4 cheap (which is VERY doable so I don't consider that a real limiter)

In terms of primes, all 3 systems do pretty well, except Nikon lacks an inexpensive UWA AF lens to compete with the Canon 16/2.8 or the Samyang 18/2.8 FE, and Nikon also lacks an inexpensive short tele like the Sony 85/1.8 or the Canon 85/2 Macro, but there the S 85/1.8 is not that much more money (used cost is about the new cost of the competition) and it's simply a better lens. Nikon also has some good 3rd party lenses here, so it's only really inexpensive & decent AF UW primes where there's a real gap. Sony's biggest issue is that their 28/2 and 50/1.8 are pretty lousy, but there's a wealth of better 3rd party options in the same price range (some of which are also in Z mount, none are in RF except a long out of production Samyang 85/1.4)

Nikon's got good body offerings though. Sony's body offerings are pretty much terrible in this price range (the A7C line is a disaster ergonomically despite goo dinternals) unless you track down an used A7III which is already inferior to the R6 or R8 in most regards. The Z5 is also better than the A7III as an all-purpose camera (better handling, better IBIS), but slower in AF and frame rate (I'd rather use a Z5 than an A7III, but the A7III is a better action camera, but the R6 is far better as an action camera than either Nikon or Sony offering). You can also readily get used Z6's and even Z6II's in the price range I'm talking about (essentially sub-$2K CAD, or $1599 USD or so, the cost of a new R8) and Z7's are also available here used, as are A7RIII's now. So for used, you have good enough options from all 3 makers, but new the best options are Canon followed by Nikon (given I cannot recommend the A7C series to anyone due to handling issues)

So in short, I think Canon does offer a lot at the range I was playing in. I tend to do mid-range gear for the most part, augmented by higher-end MF glass. Canon does really well at the first, but lousy at the second half. 

I think that if the camera is a tool for you to get great photographs, and/or you want a solid selection of 1st party lenses that covers your needs at a diverse set of price points, Canon is hard to beat. The RF system from the R5/R6 onwards is just quietly competent and Canon offers the best all-round performance options at the lower end of the price range for FF bodies. 

If you want some quirks or 'soul' in your setup, and/or want access to oddball & interesting lenses that are fun to shoot as much for what they do badly as what they do well, a better manual lens experience, inexpensive higher-MP bodies or the camera itself is part of your hobby, there's other, better options. Unsurprisingly, the Z7 hits on multiple aspects of that second list compared to the R6, and I'm definitely more of a category 2 shooter. 

2024 Review and 2025 Goals

Canon R6, RF 24-105 IS STM

I had 3 goals for 2024

1. Shoot 10,000 images with one camera system (split)

2. Take 7 major photographic outings (pass)

3. Get my post/like percentage up to 66% on Fred Miranda (fail)

For #1, I'm still shooting Canon RF, but I only shot 3,827 photos in 2024, so it's really still in progress

#2 is a pass, I just managed to achieve this by September

#3 is a fail, I wasn't really all that active on FM, so I was only able to raise my ratio up to 63.2%

So for 2025, my goals are going to be largely similar.

 1. Reach 10,000 images shot on one camera system without a system change

2. Take 7 major photographic outings

3. Get my post/like percentage up to 66% on Fred Miranda

#1 is something I keep trying and failing to do. We'll see about 2025. 

#2 proved reasonable, so I'll repeat it.

#3 remains my FM engagement goal. It will stay until I either stop my involvement on FredMiranda or achieve it (and then set a higher goal).

Some Updates

Canon EOS R6, RF 16mm f2.8, 3-shot/1 stop bracket to HDR

Well, after 13 months, the R7 is gone. That's still a recent record for me to keep a camera, and I for once didn't switch systems. I'm still all-in on RF, and now solely on FF. I also sold off my EF-S 10-18 STM, TT Artisan 25/2 APS-C and of course the RF-S 18-150 was a kit with the R7 so it went in with it. 

The R7 got sold because I needed a good longer telephoto option more than I needed a backup body. So it went in to trade for an RF 100-400. The RF 100-400 is slow (f5.6-8), but tiny, lightweight, shockingly sharp and with outstanding close focus. It is an ideal bugging lens, can take a TC and long enough for occasional airshow/bird/wildlife photography. 

 I also added the wee RF 16/2.8 a few weeks ago, giving me a small and surprisingly good UWA for the R6.

This makes my kit the following:

R6

16/2.8, 24/1.8 IS Macro, EF 50/1.8 STM, EF 70-200/2.8 L IS v1, RF 100-400/5.6-8 and an adapted Nikon-mount Tamron 90mm f2.8 AF Macro (plus all my old Nikon MF glass if I decide to pull it out of storage)

I will still like to have a second body, but that will be either adding an R8 for light carry, or demoting the R6 to backup and adding an R5 or R6II to maintain battery commonality. Both options are viable (even together in the long term)

In terms of lenses, the next priorities for me really will be a fast 35mm and either the 85/2 IS Macro or the EF 100/2.8 L IS Macro, so I can go all-in on native or EF lenses for my common work and get a real replacement for the R7/RF24 combo. For the 35, it will probably be either the RF 35/1.8 IS Macro or a used Sigma 35/1.4 Art in EF, not sure which as I'd like both the size of the RF and the speed of the Sigma. Beyond that I'd like to add the RF 14-35/4L and RF 24-105/4L to round out a zoom-based hiking kit. The RF 14.x Extender is also on the to-acquire list. I might add the RF15-30 & RF24-105STM as interim/ultra-light options. 

I also finally started to add UHS-II cards to my arsenal, we'll see if I even notice the difference. Not a lot of stuff I do really stresses the buffer on my R6. 

Random Gear Thoughts

 

Canon EOS R7, RF-S 18-150 IS STM

The photo above is from probably the best midsize walkaround combo I've ever owned. The combo of size, focal length range and effective crop capability of the lens and sensor are superb. Essentially it's a 29-300 in one lens, if I crop to 20mp m43 format for the long end (which is very doable on that sensor as it has the same pixel density as the OM-1). 

The RF-S 18-150 has been a surprising gem, and I've also shot a fair bit of video with it, as I have a non-Photography youtube channel that's been shot exclusively with the R7 since June. I will be testing out the R6 as a B-cam for it, but the R7 will remain the main video camera since it's got somewhat better sorted video controls (Video is NOT on the mode dial, but a position on the power switch, allowing easier switching, although that also means I occasionally accidentally put it in video mode instead of stills. The R6mII's separate and dedicated switch is the best setup of the lot). The close focus and good sharpness of the 18-150 has proved quite useful for my video needs in addition to being a good stills lens.

Don't get me wrong, it's not L glass, but it does punch above its weight as a kit lens and delivers quite acceptable results for the way I use my images. 

Overall the RF system is proving to be a nice mix of capability for me. While not perfect, and definitely lacking in 3rd party AF options, the 1st party native lenses fit my needs pretty well and are IMHO better selected than Nikon's, the mix of bodies is good at the low/mid-range (the weak spot IMHO is the R3, which isn't really competitive vs the A1/A9mIII/Z8/Z9 competition). One very nice aspect is how seamless the EF integration is, it makes using adapted EF lenses extremely seamless. I've done adaptation of AF SLR lenses on Fuji, m43, Nikon and Sony and the only comparable experience was Nikon E lenses on Z (and I found the older mechanical aperture lenses to be less nice to adapt, although generally capable). 

Speaking of L glass, my cheap 70-200L has had a new lease on life on the R6. While it was quite good on the R7, especially if stopped down, it did not wow me. That's largely because a 20-ish year old optical design and the R7's very high pixel density were not a great combo if I was looking for top notch performance. On the much lower density R6 sensor however the 70-200L moves from quite good to excellent and I've gotten a selection of shoots that I am absolutely loving with that combo. 

I also added the RF 24/1.8 IS Macro to my bag, providing a wide angle option for the R6 and a walkabout prime for the R7. It's quite a good lens and I'm liking it so far, although I've not used the macro focusing much yet. I do need an UWA for the R6 though, and will also need to add a second EF to RF adapter so I can run my 10-18 on my R7 and my 70-200L on my R6 at the same time. Probably will go for the control ring version to get that extra control point for the R6/70-200L combo. 

2024 Update and 2023 Review

Canon EOS R6, EF 70-200/2.8L Mk1

It's been a while, usually I post a wrap up and next goals in January. This year life interfered and I was far too busy and focused on non-Photography stuff in December, January and February to update.

I had 3 goals for 2023, and achieved one of them.

The goals were:

1. Take 10,000 images with one camera (Failed)
2. Take 2 major photo outings per quarter (Failed)
3. Get my Fred Miranda Like to Post ratio over 60% (Succeeded at just shy of 62%)

The first was a stretch goal and I'd commented that I'd be happy enough if I got to over 5000 images on the R7, which I did succeed, as I ended the year at 5600 images on the camera. That's been somewhat unusual for me given my low rate of shooting and system switching. Combined with ~2500 on the OM-1, I shot around double the number of images in 2023 as I did in 2022.

The second failed very simply because I was far too busy in Q4 and as a result only had one outing. 

The third succeeded, and in fact I'd hit it by mid-year. 

 So for 2024, what are my goals?

1. Shoot 10,000 images without changing camera systems. 

2. Take 7 major photo outings in the year
3. Get my Fred Miranda Like to Post ratio over 66%

And yes, I still have the R7 and it will continue to see regular use, although it's somewhat been downgraded to my video/second/small body recently as I just added an R6 to my bag. The R6 addresses my main usage complaint with the R7 (AF tracking against busy backgrounds is frustrating) and adds a second body for situations where I don't want to swap lenses. I will need a second EF adapter for the best config, since that would be the EF-S 10-18 on the R7 and the EF 70-200L on the R6, both of which need an adapter. 18-150 on the R7 and 70-200L on the R6 will likely be the standard combo for now.

Regarding gear, I plan to slowly add more FF lenses now that I have an FF body again, I need a flash as well, and also a new tripod as my most used one was in my Jeep when it was stolen last December, which is a large part of why I failed goal 2 for 2023. 

Ideally I'd like to exit 2024 still shooting the R6/R7 combo. That would be something of a record for me, with one camera then being at 18+ months of ownership and the second at 10 months. I do plan on concentrating on glass for now, filling out my system. 

My First L Lens

 

Canon R7, EF 70-200L f2.8 IS USM

I've never actually owned a fast telezoom before. I've generally prioritized size & weight over a fast aperture for my zoom lenses, especially telezooms which are naturally larger & heavier than wide & normal zooms, and for what I usually shoot that is definitely the correct choice. However sometimes you just find the right deal at the right time and I did with this 70-200L. 

The main use for a fast telezoom for me is environmental nature shots in shaded forest, the best solution I ever had for that was the m.Zuiko 75/1.8 (150mm-e), but it wasn't very flexible since it was a prime. The m.Zuiko 40-150/4 Pro offered the flexibility (and was the fastest AF telezoom I'd bought previously) and the size/weight, but had no TC compatibility and still was lacking a bit of lens speed in some situations. 

What I acquired is an original 70-200L f2.8 IS USM with a touch of Schneideritis (outer edge element separation in glued lens elements) that does not impact IQ. This gives me a fast, TC-compatible lens ideal for use in lower light situations like shady forests, at the cost of a frankly lousy MFD (1.4m) and a bunch of weight (almost 1.5Kg). It's a very situational lens and likely will stay home much of the time, but it is a good lens to have available in case, especially at the incredibly low price I paid for it due to the Schneideritis. With a 1.4x TC on the R7, it's also got enough reach for airshow and limited birding use, so I will have to add a TC to the kit as well. The main reason I would not normally look at a lens like this is it simply costs too much for something that's very situational for me, so getting one at a steep discount addresses the main downside of the lens for me. 

It will be interesting to work with this lens, as it is so different from my usual choices in this focal length range. It will definitely stay home a fair bit due to the weight, but when I do haul it, I do expect to get shots I'd otherwise miss due to lack of light.

It also brings out just how good the experience of adapting EF lenses has been so far on the R7. I've used fully coupled adapters on m43, F and E/FE mounts and always found significant downsides. m43 was just terrible AF, even with a faster body like an E-M1 series, plus big lens/little camera handling issues. On F mount the FTZ adapter worked seamlessly with the 70-300E, but was a little annoying with older lenses, and the physical design made handling suck (the newer FTZII addresses the handling issue by dropping the useless integrated tripod mount that caused the handling issues) and in Sony the integration of mechanical aperture lenses was pretty meh (plus there were only a few SSM/SAM lenses with decent AF), and going with an EF to E adapter resulted in inconsistent performance.

With the EF to RF adapter, the experience so far has been seamless, although I'm only using native Canon glass for coupled adaptation (my Tamron 90mm is uncoupled, being a Nikon lens on a mechanical F to EF adapter). Aside from being a little large, I've had zero issues using the EF-S 10-18 IS STM, the EF 50mm f1.8 STM or the EF 70-200L f2.8 IS USM on the R7 with the standard Adapter. It's worth also noting that Canon actually makes 4 different adapters. There's an inexpensive standard adapter, a Control Ring version which has an additional control ring to substitute for the control ring that's on the RF lenses and not on EF lenses, a filter version which accepts a filter holder (available with either a polarizer or variable ND) and a Speedbooster, marketed for the Super35 cine bodies but which works fine on the RF-S bodies as well. My recommendation is to get the Control Ring adapter unless you have some reason to want one of the others. I have the standard one and plan to add the Control Ring version to my kit later in the fall. 

First Goal Down

 

Brennans Creek, Killaloe, ON

Canon R7, Canon EF-S 10-18 IS STM on EF->RF Adapter

I've got 3 goals for 2023, defined in my 2022 Wrap-up and 2023 Goals post.

As of yesterday, I've achieved Goal #3, to get my Like to Post ratio on FredMiranda up to 60%. 

Since image posts tend to get a lot more likes than gear arguing, this goal was set to push me towards more focus on the images I'm making and less on the gear I'm making those images with. In doing so I discourage my own chasing the dragon and am less likely to take a break from FM because I'm annoyed. 

This one was admittedly set while I was shooting m43, where the low-traffic m43 image threads meant I'd usually get 3-4 likes on a good image. Now with Canon and the higher-traffic threads I'll usually see 10-15 likes per post (Sony was even higher, at 15-20 for a good image). I'm going to keep pushing on this as I might actually be able to get close to my 2022 goal of a 70% ratio. 

Regarding the other two goals

1. 10,000 images on one camera. I'd just broken 3,000 images on the OM-1 when I sold it, of which about 2500 were shot in 2023. I'm now just under 2500 on the R7 after around 1 month of ownership. I think the overall goal is achievable with the R7 as I expect to exceed 3000 images in the next couple weeks. Based on current trends I expect the R7 will be the first camera I've owned in a long while to exceed 5000 images and I'm on track for 10,000 this year.

2. Two major photo outings per quarter. I'm on track for this, although I just barely made it in Q1. This is going to be easy to maintain through the end of Q3, but Q4 and the late fall doldrums will present a challenge. 

Overall, the R7 continues to be a success for me. I enjoy shooting with it, and I increasingly am looking for reasons to use it, which is a big win. 

Regrets - I've Had a Few

 "The Road Ahead"

Sony A7RIV, FE 28-60mm

That's the last image I'll post from the A7RIV. 

Regrets have been something of a bane for me. Often my gear decisions have been driven by 'I really miss that lens', notably getting both my last E-M5II and my OM-1 have been driven by my love for the m.Zuiko Pro 12-40/2.8. Then I inevitably end up regretting not having those great FF RAW files, or not being able to adapt FF glass the way I want. I really need to put an end to this vicious cycle, as the end result is inevitably I have a more constrained set of gear than I should because I lost value on the last system switch. 

In looking back, and at the lenses Sony has announced this year (or is rumoured to be about to drop) I'd started to build up some regret at selling off the A7RIV. It was a good camera, and if it didn't really make me want to get out and shoot, it didn't stop me either. I'd likely still be shooting it if I'd still had it when the 20-70/4G was announced, that would have been the perfect replacement for the FE 28-60, which was a decent little lens but not quite wide enough and didn't focus close enough for me. And there's so much cool glass in E mount that I do miss the option to drool over all the options. Which of course had a flip side of I didn't buy them because I didn't have budget to buy every lens that takes my fancy, even if they are cheap, and never could pick which cheap lens to buy. There are some advantages of a more constrained lens lineup, less analysis paralysis. 

The regrets around the A7RIV have me looking closer at FF options again and I found yet another surprise with Canon RF glass. I've realized that I really should have taken a closer look at the RF stuff a couple years ago. 

My biggest complaint about FF kit after size has long been that the close focus usually sucks, especially compared to m43 Olympus glass, and I do a LOT of near macro work (bees, flowers, mushrooms, etc). In RF mount, it doesn't. In fact the lenses seem to be overall better than the already outstanding OM glass in MFD. I'm kicking myself a little bit now, as if I'd bought into RF instead of the A7RIV, I'd almost assuredly be still using it today as essentially none of my relatively minor frustrations with the A7RIV and Sony exist in RF mount. Flip/twist LCD's on everything except the lowly R100, an APS-C option with good ergonomics, compact and reasonably priced zooms, and zooms with good MFD. Also better grip ergonomics and weather sealing. The only remaining frustration from Sony is the IBIS/EXIF data issue for manual glass and that's comparatively minor as I shoot less and less adapted glass. 

What does this mean overall? First off, I'll almost assuredly grow into FF again. For landscape an R5, 14-35, 24-105L and 100-400 kit simply makes the most sense overall as a long-term setup. Since that kit is decent for the R7 as well, I'll likely head that way before any FF body is acquired (the RF100-400 will almost assuredly be a late July acquisition). That would make my light hiking kit that R5 based setup eventually, and I'd add the R7 and a macro lens for a 'heavy' kit.

Now if I can just pull off staying in a single system long-term...

R7 at 2000

 

R7, RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM, frame 2002 from the R7, cropped vertically to m43-ish.

Today is my 14th day of ownership of the R7, and yesterday I exceeded 2000 shots on it. That's something of a record for me, I've not gone all-out shooting with a new camera this way since I briefly had my E-M1.2 a couple years ago. 

I'm not entirely sure why either. The OM-1 was objectively a better camera than the R7 (as it should be given the cost difference between the two), I got along with it reasonably well and I had great glass for it, but it didn't make me want to shoot it. The R7 I just want to pick up and shoot and I've been looking for reasons to get out with it. It's just a fun camera and I can't even tell you why that is. I do think one part of it is the EM-1/OM-1's do require thinking to operate, they are such complex beasts with so many direct controls and multi-use options that they don't get out of my way as well as the somewhat simpler but still very capable R7 does. 

Mostly I've been shooting with the 18-150. It's a killer little lens for a kit lens. Good range, even if I do wish it was just a bit wider (15-150 would have been perfect). Good close focus, fast AF (it will track BiF) and I can really crop down to get m43-level reach out of it since the R7 has the same pixel density as the OM-1. The optics are quite decent too. Nothing to write home about, but also quite acceptable with good resolution and colour and decent contrast. Not as good as my OM Pro lenses, but as good or better than the non-Pro Oly zooms I've had in this range (14-42 and 40-150 R)

Honestly, despite it being slower and softer than the 40-150/4 Pro, I actually like it better for everyday use because of the much better close focus. I do miss the 12-40 Pro though. The shot above I could not have got with the 40-150 Pro, it just didn't focus close enough. The 12-40 did, but didn't have the working distance needed for this sort of shot. The combo of 150mm, 0.45m close focus (at 150mm) and m43-level pixel density makes the R7/18-150 a great bugging combo. 

In terms of the number of shots, it's a measure that's sort of irrelevant and sort of not. I've been trying for a few years to quit chasing the dragon and never quite succeeded. Right now it seems I've generally had cameras I got along with last for 8-9 months and around 3000 or so shots. That's where I had the OM-1 when I sold it, the A7RIV, the last E-M5II, even the Z5 was there on shot count if not on time. The last camera I had that broke that was the X-T2 (which got up around 4500 frames). So I'm trying to break that trend, more in terms of time than shots, but shots too (hence my 10,000 frames on one body goal for this year). I don't see myself completely breaking the cycle, but if I can stick to a single system I'd be pretty happy. So let's see where I am next March (which would be 9 months on the R7). I'm expecting I'll have added at least one body to the mix (likely the R10 or R50 as a B-cam) but I want the R7 to remain a key part of my setup for a good long while, so I can focus instead on rounding out my lens collection. 

TTArtisan 25/2 and some related R7 thoughts

 R7, TTArtisan 25/2 RF

I don't know why I never really took to the idea of using manual m43 lenses on the OM-1. Despite the OM-1 being well setup for it, manual lenses on m43 somehow never appeal to me despite my enjoyment of the use on the Fuji kit and now on the R7. Kind of weird, but my brain is sometimes that way.

I grabbed the TTArtisan 25/2 for the R7 pretty much immediately when I got the camera. It's a compact wide/normal, 40mm-e, prime on RF mount and I think it's a bit of a gem. I was expecting something very close to the Neewer/7Artisan 25/1.8 I had in Fuji mount when last I shot that mount, which was about the same price and frankly was a cheap lens that felt cheap to use but had kind of nice optical performance in the right conditions. The 25/1.8 also had a terrible manual focus feel until the helical wore in (and clearly it was going to wear out at the helical in a few years).

The TTArtisan lens on the other hand is very nicely built, came with infinity focus dead on in a nice presentation box. Optically it's maybe a touch better, but the real nice aspect is the solid construction and well damped focus ring. It's a fun little lens to use in a way the 25/1.8 wasn't. I will definitely be adding a few more inexpensive manual focus lenses to the R7 kit. They're just fun to use and the results are pretty good to excellent. The 18/6.3 body cap and 12/2.8, both from 7Artisans, are on my list as are more TTArtisan lenses. 

The R7 is pretty good in actual use for these manual lenses. The Focus Peaking implementation is essentially the Olympus experience inverted. It's active by default, but disables when the shutter is half pressed or magnify is on, vs having to be activated by a button each time like on the OM-1. IBIS/Lens Data is pretty much the same experience as Sony, no EXIF and you have to put in the Focal Length each time for IBIS. Handling is very good and Manual Mode with Exposure Comp and Auto ISO is supported, so the shutter speed essentially is an on the fly adjustable auto-ISO step control. 

The one other thing is that I just want to get out and shoot with the R7, at least so far. I never quite felt that way with the OM-1. Really not sure why, the camera fit me well but lacked excitement for me in some fashion I just don't understand.

More R7 Thoughts and Damn You Sony

 

Canon R7, EF 75-300 f4-5.6 III USM on EF to EF Adapter

Canon R7, RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.3, 3 shot/1 stop bracket to HDR

First off, Sony - Why couldn't you have announced your 2023 f4 zooms in 2022? I likely would have kept the A7RIV if the 20-70/4 and the rumoured new 70-200/4 Macro (to be announced July 12th) had been available. Those two lenses would address most of my lens complaints with FE mount. Compact, good range, excellent glass unlike the mediocre ZA 24-70 and G70-200/4 and better close focus. My only beef is the 16-35/4 being Power Zoom and I'd probably just run a 15/16mm prime instead as a complement to the 20-70/4 if I was still running Sony kit. 

When I saw the rumour for the 70-200/4 Macro I had some regret that I didn't stay Sony, which lasted until I saw the rumours for the A6700, which looks to be based on the A7c body design (which I dislike immensely). It solves none of the ergonomic issues of the A6600, even if the internals will no doubt be excellent. I still say Sony needs an A7000 which is the A6700 internals, possibly with more buffer in an A7IV body. 

Guess I didn't wait long enough before jumping ship to OM System. That said, I'm not unhappy with where I ended up. 

I've had the R7 now for a week and I'm getting used to it. I need to do a manual dive though, there has to be an easier way to engage AE Bracketing than how I'm doing it, I just need to figure that out. I also miss bracketing burst being automatic, but you can get it by setting a continuous advance mode. I'm thinking I need AEB to be setup on a Custom setting, so I can access it quicker. C2 likely makes sense (and C3 can be my wildlife/bugging set)

I'm up over 1300 images so far with the R7 now. Yesterday was an 830km day with many stops for photography. I went up north-east of Barry's Bay towards Algonquin for the first time, and revisited some places I'd seen last year south of Killaloe and north of Highway 7. 

I did some RAW Bursts of Dragonflies and some regular 15fps bursts of Redwing Blackbirds. Two takeaways are that an EF 75-300 II USM is not a viable lens for this due to both IQ and slow focus and my AF settings are not very optimal. I'm not exactly experienced as a bird photographer, but it was fun. 

I also shot a lot of bracketing bursts, 3 shot/1 stop bursts which is my standard for any landscape shooting. That worked very well and having track & recompose back was really nice. The R7 does that on par with the A7RIV, the OM-1's AF didn't do that well at all (AF-C+TR would lose the track point very quickly). This is a method I started using the the A7RIV and have come to love, it's like focus & recompose, but with the subject staying locked. One nice thing with the R7 is it will subject detect automatically while using this so, as long as I get a bird/bug near the point, it will lock on and I can start tracking it. 

Overall I'm getting comfortable quickly with the R7. I've added the 10-18 STM and a TTArtisan 25/2 to the collection (and borrowed my partner's 75-300 yesterday). That gives me 16-240mm-e setup (vs the 24-300mm-e I had with the OM-1), but since the pixel density is similar between the R7 and OM-1, I can crop down to m43 to get 300mm-e. I'm really losing aperture and IQ with the 18-150 vs the 40-150/4 Pro, but gaining better close focus. 

I do like having a proper UWA zoom back, I've been using primes for that role since I sold the m.Zuiko 9-18 a few years back (excepting some brief use of the ZA 16-35/4 in fall 2021), and having a zoom for that is a nice change.  With the OM-1 I did't have any wider than 24mm-e options, but I didn't really miss it either, the subjects I shot with the OM-1 didn't really benefit much from wider, although I would have missed a wider option for sure if I'd been carrying the OM-1 yesterday.

I am planning on adding a telephoto next (likely the RF100-400) and then a higher-end normal zoom to replace the good but not quite excellent 18-150 as my go-to midrange zoom. Good chance that will be a Sigma 17-50/2.8 in EF mount if Canon doesn't bring something to the table soon or allow Sigma/Tamron to make 3rd party RF lenses. After that a native Macro is on the table, but I suspect I'll stick to the cheap manual focus primes for anything else short term. 

A Few More R7 Thoughts

EOS R7, RF-S 18-150

I dug out the Nikon F to Canon EF adapter I had buried since I sold off my EOS A2e 15-ish years ago, stuck it on my Tamron 90/2.8 Macro and did a little testing.

The basic manual lens experience is pure Sony. You set focal length for IBIS only at first glance, I will have to check on if it affects auto ISO since that seems really biased to keeping things at 1/80 or higher. No reporting in EXIF either :-(

The focus peaking implementation is excellent. WAY better than the OM-1. Magnification was already on the focus point button as well. 

This creates an oddity, the support tools for shooting manual lenses are WAY better on the OM-1. 20 lens data slots, with custom naming, all data written to EXIF, and Auto ISO respecting the FL data, but the actual shooting experience with manual lenses is better on the R7, even considering the OM-1's much better EVF. I've never quite got along with manual lenses on m43 for some reason, but the experience on APS-C and FF is generally better. Still not going all-in on adapting though, although an RP might be a fun add for FF adapting and pancake use, since I'm planning on getting the RF pancakes anyways.

I've been reading the reviews, and especially the forum angst over the perceived decontenting of the R7 vs the OM-1, X-H2(s), D500 and 7DII. This really seems to revolve around a few things.

1. The AF isn't as good as the R3 despite marketing claims

2. The buffer is too small

3. The build/EVF isn't up to par

4. No CFE B card

I'll be honest, I think Canon messed up the marketing a bit and this is the result. Namely they played up the speed camera aspect too much and the resolution camera aspect too little. 

I don't see the R7 as a true 7DII successor, but rather a different interpretation of what the EOS 7 line should be. The two key items for me are the choice in sensor (32.5MP) and the price point ($1499). The R7 in my opinion sits on top of the range of enthusiast APS-C mirrorless more than at the bottom of Pro crop mirrorless. It beats the pants off the A6600 and X-S20, which IMHO are the two closest competitors. It does cost more, but not that much more ($1-200 at MSRP). The build also reverts to something closer to the old Elan 7 than to the 7D's.

It's also more of a landscape body with good action usability than a pure action/wildlife body. It just needs landscape lenses. That 32.5MP sensor offers both excellent DR and (almost) best in class resolution.  In crop, there's nothing else anywhere near that fast with that resolution, anything with more resolution is half the speed, anything with comparable or better speed is lower resolution (20 or 26MP)

I think that if Canon had set out to make a baby R3, as the 7DII was a baby 1D and the D500 a baby D5, they would have used a 24MP sensor, if only for the inherently faster readout from the same basic sensor tech compared to the 32.5MP sensor. More data takes more time to read out and that has knock-on effects. The sensor readout speed and sensor resolution are the causes of items 1 & 2, the AF isn't as good because it's getting data slower, and the buffer is too small because the files are big. The OM-1's huge buffer can be directly tied to the 20MP resolution and 12 bit depth of its files, and even the X-H2s is only dealing with 26MP files vs 32.5 for the R7. The R7 is simply more of a generalist camera than a pure speed camera and it shows. 

The reality is the R7 is the only crop body that puts anywhere near those pixels per second out from a non-stacked sensor (the R7 does 975MP/s, the OM-1 1000 and the X-H2s 1040). The 40MP Fuji's can just match the R7 in mechanical shutter for fps ( X-H2 - 600MP/s) and everything else is slower than that in terms of MP/s (Fuji's are king there with the X-T4 and X-S20 doing 520MP/s, while the E-M1.3 does 360MP/s)

The build/EVF and card layout come down to price point. Only Nikon has delivered a sub-$2k CFE-B capable camera (Z6/Z6II when discounted). Crop is still pretty much an SD-only world, at least in the sub-$2k range with a couple of much more expensive exceptions and Canon even stuck with dual SD on the more expensive and faster R6II. That said, the R7 would certainly benefit from CFE-B in a way that the R6II won't, thanks again to those big 32.5MP files.  While the EVF is certainly nothing to brag about, again it compares quite well to the closest priced bodies, the A6600 and X-S20 are both worse, with the same panel specs, but either a poor implementation (A6600) or smaller magnification (X-S20). You have to go up to an X-T5 to get a better EVF in crop, and that's a much lower performance body all-round, but with better build and EVF, so you win some and lose some there. 

Overall, I see the R7 as the R5 on a beer budget, not an R3 on a beer budget. And I think with that focus, the performance is extremely acceptable. 

The other side of this is I think the R7's balance of features fits me a bit better than the OM-1 did. The OM-1 is more pure speed camera, and I'm a landscape guy who wants some speed on demand. The R7 is a resolution body (by crop standards) with plenty of speed if needed and just about best in class AF for APS-C (rivalling the OM-1 and exceeding everything else). For landscape use the only real advantage of the OM-1 is the LiveND feature, while the R7 gets me shots that would require use of the very situational High-Res mode on the OM-1 and of course I can just use actual ND filters as needed.

 

And a Decision is Made

 

EOS R7, RF-S 18-150 f3.5-6.3 IS STM

Unsurprisingly, I did end up making the decision to switch systems. And yes, I did go Canon. 

I was an early detractor of the RF mount, the first couple cameras seemed more like a cross between engineering test mules (especially the EOS R) and parts bin specials (both the R from the 5DIV and the RP from the 6DII and M5), the lens selections early on were really odd and I was really surprised when people started buying the RF stuff. But Canon iterated steadily on lenses, brought a couple all-round excellent bodies in the R5 and R6 and kept hitting from there. A year ago, in late June 2022, Canon finally shipped their first crop-sensor RF bodies and since then they've shipped 4 RF-S bodies from the high-end R7 down through the brand new and super inexpensive R100. And unlike Nikon these are not just 4 interpretations of the same body, although they are a mix of new bodies (R7 and R10) and RF-S versions of EF-M bodies with selective updating (R50 and R100). Only the R7 gets IBIS or the 32.5MP sensor, but the R10 and R50 share the excellent R3-derived AF system. 

The bodies are solid, but what about the lenses?

The short answer is RF-S is VERY consumer. Right now only the 18-45, 18-150 and 55-210 exist. But we're less than 1 year into the system and Canon has now matched what took Nikon 2 years to accomplish for Z DX (it's actually worse than that, since Canon launched all 3 in a 9 months span). There are also some good fitting RF lenses, namely the 16/2.8 pancake, 28/2.8 pancake, 50/1.8 muffin, the 24/1.8 IS Macro, 35/1.8 IS Macro and 85/2 IS Macro, as well as the 10--400 f5.6-8, 600/11 IS and 800/11 IS that all make sense as mid-range options. Nikon does offer a 26/2.8 pancake, 28/2.8 muffin, 40/2 muffin and 50/2.8 macro that make sense, and of course recently launched their 4th & 5th Z DX lenses in the 24/1.7 and 12-28 (some 3.5 years into the Z DX systems slow-roll launch). There is a lack of good/fast wider glass in RF mount right now, but with the R7 available, that will come and EF glass can substitute for now.

My current plan is to get an EF-S 10-18 UWA and then the RF 100-400 in a month or two. That will cover most of my hiking needs, and the 18-150 kit lens is decent enough to handle interim use. I have the EF to RF adapter and the EF 50 STM, and can borrow an old 75-300 USM III if I really need more than 150mm (240mm-e) in the interim. 

So I went with the EOS R7 kit. Some initial observations

1. The EVF is nowhere near as bad as the specs suggest. It's actually pretty good. No match for the OM-1's excellent unit, but quite usable. 

2. There's a battery charger included. Yes, an actual charger. Really. In an era where USB charge has caused manufacturers to drop the chargers, Canon is still including their LC-E6 charger. This is a VERY nice addition (the OM-1 did not include a charger, despite being a more expensive body)

3. Handling is really good. I know some find the rear dial weirdly located, but I actually like the location better than the traditional Canon location. Unlike the Fuji's, the grip fits the hand well and the buttons are in the obvious location, no weird stretches. 

4. The menus are really good. Very obvious and well laid out

5. Full touch integration, which the OM-1 lacks

6. No bracketing burst :-(  I will miss that. Engaging bracketing quickly will need some study. I shoot a lot of 3 frame brackets. 

7. I'll miss LiveND as well, but I found that I pretty much never used the other computational features, even if they were cool.

8. Better located power switch and a proper Video/stills mode switch (not on the mode dial).

9. AF is excellent. Tracking and lockon are easier to manage than the OM-1 and definitely stickier, plus basic AI Servo tracking actually works pretty well (AF-C+TR is still trash on the OM-1, despite every other aspect of the AF getting a lot better). 

10. Initial look at IQ is positive, definitely more resolution than any other crop body, rivalling high-res on the 16MP m43 bodies. I'm actually losing no reach, the Canon sensor has similar pixel density to 20MP m43, so I can crop down to get my reach back.

11. 4:3 crop mode. YAY. 1:1 and 16:9 as well. I will use the 4:3 mode for sure, I love that aspect ratio and used 4:3 mode most of the time on the A7RIV. 

12. Manual lenses are still up in the air. Supported, but a more Sony experience. I'll have to check to see if IBIS FL is written to EXIF (that would be really nice).