Canon EOS R7 and R10 have released...

[PannySVHS]

I rewatched the video on the phone and my desktop. I still must say, it looks fantastic to me. Exellent colour response and separation. Best I have seen from any camera under natural light on youtube other than Red or BM. I don´t look for Arri videos. 😉

[kaylee]

uhm im missing whats good about this

 

[PannySVHS]

I really like what's coming out of this camera. The video above is beutifully shot imho and with a fantastic image, as I gave my reasoning about before. Best test video I have seen in a long time. If disagreement is a reason to see you post again, I must say I am very happy about that.😊 @kaylee

[herein2020]

10 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

I really like what's coming out of this camera. The video above is beutifully shot imho and with a fantastic image, as I gave my reasoning about before. Best test video I have seen in a long time. If disagreement is a reason to see you post again, I must say I am very happy about that.😊 @kaylee

I guess its my turn to vote on the video.....I am actually neutral; I feel like any modern mirrorless camera if properly exposed and with the same LUT applied could look the same; that's not saying anything bad about the R7, the footage does look nice to me, but for me personally it is average.

I do like that he used a very affordable Canon EF 50mm lens vs something exotic like a MF cine lens, so to me that's a good thing as well but it does look pretty much identical to what I am getting out of the R5 even though I've only shot test footage with the R5; which again is not a bad thing at all considering the R5 is more than 2x as much and has a FF sensor.

I would like to see skin tones more with the R7, but I'm sure they just used the same Canon color science that is in the rest of their cameras so the lens and color grade could skew those results either way. Overall, its a solid offering in my book.

[kye]

2 hours ago, herein2020 said:

I guess its my turn to vote on the video.....I am actually neutral; I feel like any modern mirrorless camera if properly exposed and with the same LUT applied could look the same; that's not saying anything bad about the R7, the footage does look nice to me, but for me personally it is average.

I do like that he used a very affordable Canon EF 50mm lens vs something exotic like a MF cine lens, so to me that's a good thing as well but it does look pretty much identical to what I am getting out of the R5 even though I've only shot test footage with the R5; which again is not a bad thing at all considering the R5 is more than 2x as much and has a FF sensor.

I would like to see skin tones more with the R7, but I'm sure they just used the same Canon color science that is in the rest of their cameras so the lens and color grade could skew those results either way. Overall, its a solid offering in my book.

While the test isn't a stress test, it certainly covers a range of compositions and so does function as a reference of what can be captured.  From this perspective, I agree with you that it looks average.  With a great colourist working on it, or with more intentional compositions (like narrative, but also weddings where much effort has gone into making everything look nice) then I'm sure much nicer results can be gotten from it.

[webrunner5]

If the photo DR is this low I hate to see the Video side of it.

 

https://www.diyphotography.net/canon-eos-r7-shows-impressive-dynamic-range-over-the-7d-but-its-not-quite-up-to-the-eos-r5/

 

[kye]

18 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

If the photo DR is this low I hate to see the Video side of it.

https://www.diyphotography.net/canon-eos-r7-shows-impressive-dynamic-range-over-the-7d-but-its-not-quite-up-to-the-eos-r5/

10.5 stops isn't world-record territory, but there's a chance that the camera can encode the full DR of the sensor isn't there?  I thought that most cameras with log profiles would capture the whole DR, it was just in the picture profiles that they'd lose a stop or two.

[webrunner5]

No expert on the subject but from what I have seen most cameras are worse in video than photo DR wise. You have to figure most photo stuff is 12, 14, even 16bit raw. So that gives it an edge over video. Now maybe in HDR video but that has to be in 10bit a least.

[PannySVHS]

By their messurements Nikon D850 has 11.75 Stops and Lumix S1 has 11.5. They definately have a different measuring and results than Dxomark, though they mention their software being in use.

The APSC champion Sony A6500 has 10.5 stops of maximium dynamic range by their chart. So R7 would share that crown being up there with the very best APSC in dynamic range. Additionally the R7 is offering more pixels for photography plus much better readout than the Sony, going by the videos on youtube.

By comparison, Dxomark score on the Dxomark website is for the Panasonic S1 14.5 stops. For the Sony A6500 it's 13.7 stops. They haven't tested the R7 yet.

13.7 stops by Dxomark would be classleading.

 

[webrunner5]

But I don't think DXO measures Video DR, just Photo DR.

[kye]

19 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

No expert on the subject but from what I have seen most cameras are worse in video than photo DR wise. You have to figure most photo stuff is 12, 14, even 16bit raw. So that gives it an edge over video. Now maybe in HDR video but that has to be in 10bit a least.

With the latest cameras being 10-bit with full log profiles, I think that's changing.  It used to be the case though.

9 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

But I don't think DXO measures Video DR, just Photo DR.

That was my impression as well.

[PannySVHS]

Yeah Don, DXOmark tests for photography. So did the site you posted, which states "photographic dynamic range verus iso setting". So both dxomark and diyphotography/photonstophotos show tests for photography. The one you posted just shows much lower values than DXOmark, lower by 3 stops!:) @webrunner5

[webrunner5]

Yeah, Cleff has been doing tests on DPR for a Long time. I find his stuff more accurate in real life than DXO's. Cine D's DR test of video cameras are way more accurate than what the company's spew out.  Like Red's 20 stops bullshit.

[PannySVHS]

@webrunner5 Also by the results from your link, you would still have the R7 right up there with the Sony A6500 which sports one of the best APSC sensor for dynamic range. Add 10bit 422 and a higher 32MPixel count and it´s a pretty good sensor by this data. Fun fact, results from the website you posted, GH5MK2 betters both sensors from ISO 125 on.

How it really turns out to be in pratical use, that we will see. Also rolling shutter and other great aspects of the cultivated image.:)

I remember the Red Dragon test on DXOmark. Was really hard to believe the results. No one would ever believe these test results in the world of cinematography afaik.

[ntblowz]

That is the lens I m thinking to pair R7 as well, Meike drop in nd adapter come with clear filter too which is a big plus!

[MrSMW]

1 hour ago, ntblowz said:

That is the lens I m thinking to pair R7 as well, Meike drop in nd adapter come with clear filter too which is a big plus!

With the big crop, that would be my go to also, - was thinking about it the other day, plus using a 'between the lens & body' VND on my S1H right now.

This or the Fuji XH2s with the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 which is now available in X mount.

Not this year though and maybe never, but the two leading contenders for me right now on paper...

[ade towell]

I've been using the Meike nd adaptor for a little while now and it has been faultless, so much nicer than usual vari nd, no obvious colour change as you get to maximum nd and the 9 stops is enough here for me in the UK afternoon sun with f1.8 lenses at 800 iso. It may be a different story If you use faster lenses and live in brighter parts of the world of course...

[Kisaha]

On 7/14/2022 at 11:34 AM, ntblowz said:

That is the lens I m thinking to pair R7 as well, Meike drop in nd adapter come with clear filter too which is a big plus!

Ι work on a project (music documentary for a local high ranked mainstream singer) with 3 BM Pocket cameras (2X4K and a 6K). We decided to all go with the Sigma's but they need constant change because they are missing to many mm each!

Finally, both the 4K changed to 2 Olympus 12-100mm (4f) after only a few hours of shooting the first day. The 6K Pro continued with the Sigmas (because of lack of other choice).

A few years ago, I was using NX cameras only, had the amazing S 16-50mm (24-75mm and 2f until almost 33mm, then it goes to 2.8f with amazing I.S), so the Sigma's were a moot point for me and my needs.

I was always a bit skeptical about this choice. They are not very light or small either..

[webrunner5]

Never owned the Sigma 18-35 but aren't they sort of super sharp and really don't add or take away for the actual scene as seen, hmm not sure that is correct lol?

I would think for say a travel film, interview that would be desirable, but for a filmic, cine look I would think that would be death.

[Django]

44 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Never owned the Sigma 18-35 but aren't they sort of super sharp and really don't add or take away for the actual scene as seen, hmm not sure that is correct lol?

I would think for say a travel film, interview that would be desirable, but for a filmic, cine look I would think that would be death.

Its certainly not a vintage mojo lens but rather a very practical APS-C zoom that covers the narrow but  useful 27mm-52mm range and with a constant fast F1.8 aperture. It is very sharp and can really benefit from a Pro-Mist, upside being it resolves high-resolution exceptionally well. I really like to pair it on a P6K and I imagine will do well on a R7 too.. some "cinematic" examples of it: