Cheap Full-Frame or Expensive APS-C? Canon EOS RP vs R7
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 พ.ย. 2022
- It's an unusual but not unprecedented situation for a camera manufacturer to put to market an APS-C camera that's more expensive than one of their own full-frame cameras. How do these two lovely Canon mirrorless cameras compare - and why should people consider paying more of a camera with a smaller sensor? Let's find out.
Find them here (Amazon affiliate link - thank you for your support):
Canon EOS R7: geni.us/CanonEOSR7
Canon EOS RP with kit lens: geni.us/CanonEOSRPKitLens
Support me on Patreon! / christopherfrost
All pictures taken by me on a Canon EOS R5 camera.
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonEOSR5Body
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonEFtoRF
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma50mm14Art
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonRF35mm18Macro
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/MarumiFitSlim77
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020USBPlusMic
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSmartLavalierPlus
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC3MicAdaptor
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1nMiniRecorder
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMini2FlyMore
Music: 'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 creativecommons.org/licenses/b... - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
RP for landscape and portraits. R7 for wildlife and action.
Dynamic range for landscape is crap, no option for stacking, only manual exposure adjustments... its a nono for landscape
@@aNiTF3 I never had any need for great dynamic range or the ability to stack in camera. I'd rather have that ability to go wider. But you get what you pay for, and if that is your need, then I'd pay more and get a better camera.
@@aNiTF3 if you carry landscape gear on hikes and stay in Canon land, RP is not a bad choice. End of the day, not everyone needs R5.
@UCOH3LJAqOIBhdLVmjTSFP5w I own the original EOS R and have managed to get some good bird images with that. I'm pretty sure you can get some good images using the RP too. However I think that the R7 autofocus is much better. You can shoot a lot more frames per second, and the crop sensor gives you that extra reach. And we must consider that the R7 is twice the price.
@@frankluo230 Good point. I often use my M50 on hikes because of light weight and small size. Actually I almost always do that.😂
As someone who owned a 60D from 2012 to 2019, The RP i bought back at launch still feels like a Powerhouse. I’m mostly a photographer so I barely use the video (which yeah it’s quite soft) but getting useable images at 6400 iso and having so much bokeh even at f3.5 or 4 is mindblowing to me. Different tools for different things. I wouldn’t be happier with an R7 since I really love bokeh and shooting in dim lit conditions.
I sometimes struggle with dark, moody, studio portraits with the rp. How's it for you?
@@droe90 Thats something the RP is really bad in, recovering shadow details. The tone shift is probably for some people also a problem.
The only thing which would help you in that case - overexposure as much as you can (with the very limited DR of the RP, another issue...) so you have less details to recover. Or if you have a pretty much "static" object, combine multiple exposures and hope the RP is fast enough for your needs.
"Different tools for different things. I wouldn’t be happier with an R7 since I really love bokeh and shooting in dim lit conditions"
I would not be that sure about this full frame "myth"...
Just take as example a basic 30-35mm APS-C prime lens... some are aviable with F0,95 or F1.4. They basically give a similar or even better bokeh than a RF 50mm 1.8 for a similar price.
If you really want bokeh monsters at full frame, its going very fast EXPENSIVE, if you want the same at APS-C... a ton of super cheap manual focus lenses and still more than affordable AF ones also aviable.
Also, have you ever used a F0.95-1.8 lens? If its not too short in focal lenght like 10mm or so you still get out of focus background and many, especially cheap MF 0.95 and F1.4s give me better background blur than my RF 50mm 1.8 give me on full frame.
Trust me, its a myth... the real advantage of Full frame is the light gathering/high ISO advantage which is sadly pretty much killed on the RP. Its sadly true, the RP doesnt perform a lot better in high ISO than the R7 (despite much bigger pixels). Just at ISO 12.800+ i see a slight improvement for high ISO/low light.
Which is another problem (and RPs disadvantage): noise... the noise pattern of the EOS RP is very hard to process away without loosing too much detail/sharpness, and as another side effect of 26 vs 32MP: The R7s much more compressed noise pattern, beside the fact its noise is much nicer to edit out... R7 is just as good or better than the RP (for 99% of all usecases)
Its a shame i can pull out better the shadows and recover the highlights with the R7 than i can do with the RP - The RPs DR and annoying noise pattern are just "too bad" for 2022/2023 in my opinion (who is wondering at an old 6D Mk2 sensor?). None the less, i still love my RP. I can shoot at least in ISO 50.000 or 100.000 (Topaz Denoise AI job!), its smaller and much lighter than the R7, i use anyways mainly small F1.8 or adapted F0.95 to F2.8 primes
I only love the RP because i often need just ISO 12800+ (where the R7 really begin to struggle) and i do a lot astrophotography, beside the fact i have mainly full frame glass.
If i would not need high ISOs on a "daily base" and would not have full frame glass... trust me, there would be no question: NO NEED FOR FULL FRAME! The EOS R7 is just MUCH BETTER VALUE. A shame there is no proper (autofocus) RF-S glass and we have to adapt these lenses.
The issue of "low light" can be easily get rid of with big aperture lenses, especially since they are so much cheaper for APS-C.
I recently even tried a 30mm F1.4 sigma on R7 for low light videos instead of my trusty 50mm 1.8 and RP... the results are pretty much identical, except for the fact the R7 can do a lot better video resolution and also a finer noise so better for post.
You came from a 60D to a 6dmk2 of course you were impressed.
But i did get the 90D instead 3 years ago and that blows the 6d2/RP out of the water image quality wise.
I now own the R6 which is another big step forward despite the lower resolution
I bought the RP when it first came out and I bought the R7 recently. They are both outstanding cameras, and I think they make a great pair. I can say without a doubt though that the R7 is far superior in almost every metric that matters. My Tamron 35mm f/1.4 EF and Sigma 135mm f/1.8 lenses render beautifully on the R7 sensor.
I got an RP and I definitely don't regret it. For what I do, the autofocus is more than good enough and I just like the full-frame look better than the APS-C look. I use a lot of vintage lenses and the RP's sensor seems to get good results with them. Its noise pattern at higher ISOs also looks more film-y and random as opposed to some of the more grid-like patterns I've seen from other cameras.
Really excited to see that you are now venturing into camera reviews Chris! I know you took your time in the decision process and it shows. This is a blessing to us camera folks!!
Please more camera reviews! This is great... the side by side comparisons are the best! Thanks!
For portraits RP will hold its ground, its tack sharp and autofocus is just as good as R7 for eye tracking.
For sports and action, would the RP hold it’s own against the R7?
@@matthewsantos9011 Is this an actual question?
@@matthewsantos9011 No. It shoots too slow and the autofocus on the R7 is far superior. Besides the crop sensor gives you more reach.
@@matthewsantos9011 no it's only portraits for RP, the dynamic range is really bad to even use for landscapes. Don't get me wrong you can do all with it just fine, but alternatives are just destroying it
For action I find it's unusable with how screen goes black after every shot so its like 5 fps screen with large gaps instead of 60fps screen 👎 Tried to shoot racing, was wishing for my 80d back
I didn't really like auto focus on rp until I switch back to "shutter button" focus. I've always setup bbf but recently questioned why (on mirrorless). The DR really forces you to nail exposer.
This is exactly the kind of video I was waiting for! These comparison videos are great! More, more! Best regards, your patreon member
I love it when people say “my then girlfriend and now wife.” It’s like when you first hear “then girlfriend” you think aww they broke up but then you hear “now wife” you realize they have a happy ending. So warm!
11:41 Christopher is a man of refined tastes
Great video and comparison Christopher! Love the idea creating a camera review template to compare different cameras! Potential for hundreds of new videos. Keep going!
Recently I have purchased RP. Main competitor was R10 within this price range. I do not regret at all. Lowlight is so much better than apsc. Maybe af is not the best but I shot mainly portraits.
At 2:16 you could see the IBIS working inside the R7 when you were moving it around. Just super interesting watching it do it's thing since I rarely have a reason to just look at the naked sensor of my cameras.
very good Vid.. be interesting to do an RP vs R10 as they are similar in price
Great review- again. Enjoy your reviews keep them coming! Many thanks
Excellent review, hits all the key points. Great to see this solid combination of test environment and real world situations. Very helpful, thank you.
Been waiting for this. Thanks
I have the R7 and was thinking about the RP as a backup camera, thanks to your review I am sure I will go for the RP. Clear and good review as always. Cheers from Belgium
Enjoyed the comparison. Something I've wondered as well.
Love your word choices. Another awesome, interesting video. Thank you very much!
Nice review! I own the R7 now since 2 months and totally love it.
Outstanding comparison! Well done sir.
Excellent review Chris - Just one correction (Unless I'm thinking of the wrong thing); the RP does Focus Stack for you, is a setting within the menu that you can access
I hope you continue doing more camera reviews, your lens videos are just amazing. I got into a 90D as my first camera just because lenses are lower prices now. I hope you can do a review on the 90D compare to the equivalent mirrorless
The R7 beats the 90D in terms of features but the 90D is still a super competent camera. I got mine 3 years ago and it is at the top of what APSC can do regardless of mount. Only the new fuji xh2 can touch it but that is to be expected after so much time
The R7 basically has the same sensor as the 90D and the M6ii, so you're really not missing out on that front.
I keep my 90D to use with telephoto lenses, to get even more out of them with the 1.6 crop factor. And then I added an RP, to get the full coverage of my wide angle lenses.
It was a nice combination, but the RP proved to be my ‘gateway’ into the RF lenses system… and to the R6, which certainly has a better AF.
Chris, you are missing the point of ISO performance by testing 2 caneras against each other in well lit (bright day) environment.
If you would test them with limited light source scenery, FF would have an advantage, hands down, even if R7 has a never more advanced sensor
Thanks for an excellent and comprehensive review. The RP was recently available for around €770, with a further 120 cashback. Against the R7 that is enough to buy 2-3 RF series primes. If you have a fixed budget that does not extend to an R7 + L-class lenses then the EOS RP is still hard to beat as a travel or portrait system, especially if you have some older EF glass available and get the EF-RF adaptor.
I’ve used the RP extensively for concert and nightlife photography for almost 3 years now. I was teetering on getting an R7 for a long time before the R6 mark ii was announced. The RP was a huge step up from a 60D, but I’m really excited to move up into a professional body after all these years.
hey I am a concert photographer too and I was considering buying an rp for stills and little bit video work after mounting it on a gamble ,whats your opinion on it , Is there a way I can see what you have shot on it ?Website link or /
@@sahejchawla9771 I've been told it's not very good for video.
11:40 A great comparison review as always. One can rely on a Chris Frost review to get a good insight of the products featured. I was however thrown by the Neil Breen ‘twisted pair’ DVD at 11:40 Didn’t really think you were Neil Breen fan .
Fantastic video and comparison and I really like/appreciate your style of review... Its get to the required facts rather than just focusing (excuse the pun) on superficial aspects.
Keep up the good work.
Awesome really appreciated hearing your thoughts and opinions. A s a portrait and product photographer on a budget that has squeezed as much as I can from my Canon 700D APSC for the past 8 years and held off updating, either the RP or R7 would be great for me. The dilemma is that both need an adaptor to make use of my EF lenses so is extra cost there already and while RP and those fab bokeh and lens forgiving shots ffrom full frame appeal greatly, the R7 capabilities seems perfect for my needs
Thank you, Christopher! Great comparison.
Good work Chris - keep it up!
Excellent review, thanks
excellent topic for a video! very helpful thanks
This is a great comparison to make. Thanks.
I recently bought the R7. At first i was devided between the R7 and the EOS R, but i ended up buying the R7. I simply find this camera the perfect package. I'm super satisfied with it. The 15 shutter speed still baffles me. It's a solid camera and i'm in love with it
Frame rate*
@@railx2005 what lens do you suggest for it for portraits?
@@spuddlefunk it really depend on ur budget. I use 28-70 f2
@@railx2005 I would love that, but the 24-70 is what I’m looking at. In terms of cost I’m also considering the 90d with some sigma glass for image stabilization. I’m not sold on mirrorless at the moment - at all
👎 foco obturador mecânico!
Great review. I would have liked to have seen RAW images during the image quality comparison, not jpegs.
Also, the ability to boost shadow detail would have been an interesting test. In this case I recall that the RP sensor (also from the 6DM2) was horrible in this regard, part of that bad generation of sensors from Canon (which was a big part of many switching to Sony).
This review makes me think about considering aps-c again; when I first got a full frame camera my landscape images were so much cleaner I swore I would never go back to aps-c.
Also one note for APS sensors is Fujifilms X mount having everything about it being made for crop sensors. From the focal lengths matching full frame equivalents on traditional first part lenses (ie 70-200 is a 50-160 for Fuji) and having crazy fast lenses to get those out of focus shots as best you can with a crop sensor. I know this is about Canon's cameras, but it's one thing that got me looking into Fuji for my jump from DSLR to Mirrorless.
Plus, you get more features for the money on Fuji, better build quality and weather sealing... You have to be seriously married to a whole bunch of lenses to consider any other system than Fuji for APS-C. I used Nikon APS-C professionally throughout the DSLR era and even though I was heavily invested I immediately switched to Fuji when Nikon started phoning it in on APS-C. The Z50 is a joke in incredibly bad taste.
You can’t go wrong. I have both. For vintage lenses I use a focal reducer which almost takes it to FF coverage and is VERY good.
I don't think fuji marks there lenses as "equivalent focal length"
Fuji only makes a couple lenses that are actually equivalent to full frame, and only mid range options at that. They have nothing equivalent to a full frame 16-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 50mm f1.2, 85mm f1.4 (the 50mm f1.0 is not equivalent and is quite soft).
Pretty cool to see the differences in technology in just a few years.
Im still rocking my 7D mkii and this is the first time i have felt an upgrade might truly make a tangible difference.
Thanks for the comparison. Just one tiny correction: The RP *does* have focus stacking (called focus bracketing in the menu).
Great review Chris! I would love to see a showdown exactly like this, but also with fuji, and sony FF + aps-c
good review, brought me some new insights.
Good work sir, again!
As someone who used the original canon 7D from 2011 up until 2022, I will never go back to a crop sensor camera ever again.
Great video as always! Thank you. A comparison between the R7 and the EOS R would have been interesting, too. Pricewise they are in the same ballpark and the R produces a better image than the RP. Still it is outdated when it comes to AF and overall handling
great comparison. Thank you.
Awesome video, very usefull
It's not every day you spot one of Sir Neil Breen's masterpieces in a camera shootout. Now I know why your production value has improved so quickly, Chris!
Very useful and interesting content Chris, thanks!! I would love to know what lenses were used for the comparative shots on the image testing chart, as that can effect the results in sooooo many ways.
Just the review I was looking for 😃
Just the man im looking for. I'm literally thinking the same thing. Thanks chris for always sharing your thoughts to us
So great!!! I absolutely love your channel and reviews! So much valuable information that quite frankly you are the best at! I use your reviews as gospel because you're so good and detailed. Im learning to be Pro. Landscape and Night/Astro. I would love to see you do a comparison of the Canon R and the new R7. Now that they are basically the same price. Im looking to see if I should buy the R7 and if R I have is still good to use too. Especially can you do some checks for Night and Astro photography too? Low light etc for Canon and Sony? Im wondering if I should eventually go to Sony even though I am still paying off the Canon R and RF 70-200 2.8 hah. Im an old Canon fan. Thank you so much for your amazing videos and channel!
Thanks for the comparison. I have the RP but i'm still looking at the R7 because of the extra features like C-Log and fps and the mechanical shutter.
I bought the RP refurb (body only) direct from Canon for $599. For a hobbyist like me, I think that’s a steal relative to the higher-priced R7 (refurb R7 is $999).
Hi Christopher, love you videos and watch them over and over when comparing lenses to buy! Thanks for your hard work and in-depth research! Could you possibly do a comparison of different speed boosters on the sharpest lenses you personally use so we can see the difference with and without on cameras like the R7 as far as resolution and low ISO’s it provides for clearer images and higher shutter speeds in low light ? Thanks! 😊
In each and every image the RP colours are richier and and nicer to look at ad we are not even talking about bokeh and real night images where the green and red dot punch in.
For Wildlife and sport the R7 has its place but I' NEVER use it for portraits and Landscapes over the RP.
The reason why I sold the RP was the lack of image stabilization and mechanical shutter. If you don't mind those two the the RP brand new can be found at around 700$/€ and you can buy a pretty good lens with the left of money
Thanks for the review. Just got an Rp.
Christopher I hope you read this.
I have also tried the Canon RP, but I ended up selling it, due to needing to edit my raw pictures a lot. I ended up buying the Canon 5D Classic, and I would love you to try and makes review of it. Since it's essentially full frame for $200!! I also loved the files I got from the Canon 5D significantly more, the build quality and ergonomics
Great review Chris when you put side-by-side it’s really clear the differences get with both cameras. Why not throw the fox in the henhouse and try some different brands against each other? Or Fuji x Mount versus GFX series??
Thanks for the review Christpher. Which lens did you use with the cameras for your test? Thanks and all the best!
Hey Chris, love your videos and reviews. Do you plan to review the new Fuji 30mm 2.8 Macro lens? Would love to watch your thorough testing and thoughts on this lens 🙂
Great review! It's good to see Canon doing so much with the smaller size sensor. Having two sd card slots must be an important feature for the wedding photographers. However, apart from the video capability, I wonder if a good wedding photographer could use a much much older DSLR & still delight the couple with the photos? An interesting challenge would be to shoot an outdoor wedding with two cameras. Maybe the R7 and a Canon 40D & see if the clients can see any difference in the photos when viewed on a really good laptop.
I read years ago its the lens and not the body that influences picture quality the most and that is especially the case with zoom lenses.
RP is a FANTASTIC camera. It’s so easy to use. I also have M6 MKII and I’m keeping it because of Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 lens (legendary sharpness) and 22mm 2.0 lens (portability).
Good review - subscribed! As you've said, with all things - it's what you shoot. I am on the cusp of moving into R. As I primarily want a studio \ model camera, I will probably go with the RP. I currently use the M50 in the studio and for shooting models - If you can't get good results in the studio with a camera < 10 years old, it ain't the camera that's the problem.
One thing I would say, is rather than cropping FF images to look like APSC - it might have been better to illustrate the bokeh difference by comparing the "same" FOV shoot from the 2 different cameras. That's where you see the bokeh difference.
I am kinda torn between RP - smaller, lighter, FF and MOAR bokeh (lets not forget that its 500 notes cheaper as well) but I like the look of the R7s fast shooting and focus for weddings, I imagine I could replace my old 7D mark 2 with it. I'll probably buy both and lament not being able to justify an R5 :D
Thanks for the comparison! Would love to see one between R7 and X-T4...
Does anyone offer more detailed or well thought out reviews? If they do, I’ve yet to find them.
Great idea and follow through for a video, Sir. 👍🙏😉
I recently purchased a Canon 5dsr because at a price of $1500 brand new, it was a great deal. A great camera for stills and landscape. However, I still use my Canon 80D for wild life. Using a sharp lens like the version two 100-400L lens, I get the equivalent of 160-640mm.
Love how you include the EVF recording now. Would you be so kind to explain how you do that Chris? Do you use an atomos ninja v or something similar? I have a sports photography channel myself and just got into the mirrorless world, and would love to be able to do the same, but the atomos ninja v is insanely expensive, so just asking to see if there are cheaper alternatives to record the EVF. Keep up the great work!
I have both the R (not RP) and the R7 and I LOVE the R7! I'm constantly finding myself going to the R7 because of the focusing capabilities are faster and more accurate than the R. You can't go wrong with the R7!
Same here (but RP and R7)
I mean i really love the RP with proper EF L full frame glass, but the R7 is just too awesome when it comes to autofocus and video capabilities (especially when im doing wildlife!)
But where i really like the RP and even wish a R6 at absolute least, better a Sony A7S III: When doing "wildlife" macro video/photos with heavily dimmed light on my insects and reptiles.
Hi Christopher Thanks for the review which gives a good insights, into choosing the cameras. I was wondering if you will be able to do the comparison between EOS R vs EOS R7 please
Wouldn't a R10 be a better comparison to the RP and the R7 a better comparison to the R? The R10 is around the same price area as the RP and the R7 around the same price as the R. This levels the playing field a bit and also matches the MP a bit better. Then this comparison gets even more interesting. The R10 for the same cost likely still beats the RP.
While I agree the R10 and R7 currently have a wide angle disadvantage they also have a pretty significant telephoto advantage. A 70-200 f2.8 zoom lens is expanded to 112mm to 320mm thanks to the crop factor. This can make the R10 and R7 more appealing to wildlife shooters that want to get a little extra reach out of their glass vs cropping photos in post or using a teleconverter. It's generally easier to frame and focus shots on APS-C vs shooting FF and cropping in post. Also easier to judge the movements of the subject.
I bought the Canon Rf 100-400 lens to use on my R6 because I really struggle with telephoto since moving to FF. I could go and buy an up to 600mm telephoto lens to get even more reach but it actually costs less to buy a R10 or even R7 to get 640mm on the long end with the 100-400 lens.
APS-C can take a detail hit of course but then so can a teleconverter which is kind of doing the same thing really. Cropping in post takes a detail hit as well and still asking a lot from the glass to maintain fine detail on every pixel captured.
I don't really consider APS-C as an alternative but as a tool in our kit. We use multiple lenses for the environment and situation. The same should be true of sensor sizes. FF is not superior to m43 or APS-C. Its different. It has just as many disadvantages and advantages. Having a FF and APS-C body in our kit allows us to adapt to a wider variety of situations just like having multiple lens choices.
I also shoot 4k video and hands down the R10 and R7 are way better options than the RP and R. They are truly hybrid in a way Canon only started to be with the R6. The R10 may lack a log format for video but the standard 8bit video format out of the box is very respectable and the colors amazing. For 10bit and extra colors and dynamic range it has the HDR PQ mode which I use all the time on my R6. I edit on a 14" XDR MBP and HDR really is the future of video. FCP makes it super easy to handle and convert and TH-cam can even handle the HDR to SDR conversion if desired.
I was about to get a R10 to match with my R6 as a backup and secondary camera but now I kind of want to get a R6 mk2 next and then get a R10 later to maybe replace my current R6.
Good job Chris! I wish Canon would make premium/pro quality lenses for example f1.4 or even f1.2 or f1 for RF-S !!
Interesting video thank you !
many people like myself owner of 6d mk ii are hesitating between EOS R camera bodies newer vs older ones ... so IMO it would also interesting to compare R7 with the EOS R and R6 which can be found used between 1000 and 1700 meaning similar price as R7 new ...
Maybe since the EOS R7 is totally meant to be something like a EOS 7D: a professional APS-C camera meant for wildlife and sports photography
While the EOS RP is meant for someone who wants to try a full frame camera for a budget, maybe photography students...
Love the idea of you doing camera reviews. Please do Fuji... In regards to the RP vs. R7 - I'd say consider a refurb direct from canon a 90D - it's not mirrorless but has the same res sensor as the R7 and is about 25% cheaper than the RP. OR - even a used R...
I tested the RP for about a week. It definitely had its flaws (small battery, pretty crunchy at ISO 6400), but with the optional grip, it's one of the most comfortable cameras I've ever held, and for some reason (with an adapted 24-105 II lens), the images ended up looking quite film-like and organic. I liked the lower ISO output. Somewhat surprisingly, those are the most viewed images on my Flickr account:P.
Excellent comment! Does the grip afford the use of extra battery? Happy shooting!
No, it's just really more of a strip of material that screws onto the bottom and makes the body a bit taller. As far as I know, Canon doesn't make a battery grip for the RP.
Marximus prime?
Yeah, my Flickr handle is marximusprime. There's an album called EOS RP.
@@marximus4 aww, gotcha! Thtat’s the one Canon offers up in like three accent colors?
Too bad about the smallish battery? Is the card slot UHS-1 only? Canon has something against putting a speedier card in some of their cameras! 🙄🤨😂
Interesting tests, Chris. This is something I've gone back and forth on many times, wondering if the "full frame look" is an actual thing or just an urban myth much like 3D Pop from Leica/Zeiss lenses. It's true we see want to see, but despite the technical advantages shown here of the APS-C sensor I actually prefer the look of full frame images. Also, I've just recently started playing with a Kipon Medium Format to FF speed booster, using some cheap old Pentacon Six lenses. Everything comes out looking like a Christopher Nolan IMAX film, it's amazing. You can't do that with an APS-C sensor :)
You actually can with faster lenses. There isn't a full frame look at all. Mirrorless FF does have advantages; more lenses, more adaptability options, better low light performance and dynamic range with equivalent lenses, but shallow depth of field is not one of them.
Awesome video very informative. I was wondering if you had any advice for my situation. I currently use a Canon M50 for Pet Photography. My aspiration for a while has been to upgrade a full frame camera but having since came across the newly released R7 I'm torn between what to do. Having using APC-C for some time now I'm really wondering whether I need Full Frame. I wouldnt go for the RP as its too slow for action so i would save for a full frame like canon R6. What are your thoughts?
Thanks for another interesting and informative video, Christopher. A thought: is the new Canon Divic "X" Processor pronounced "Ex" or "Ten?" Same old problem we have with Mac OSX!
Hi I've been using the RP for the past two years. Although it is slow, it is still good for low light shooting. I've compared the RP with the 200DII (of SL3) and discovered the SL3 does not produce usable images at ISO6400, while the RP does. The R7 might be as good or better in low light but we don't have the supporting lenses, I doubt canon will produce good apsc lenses that are fast (f2.8 and below). For the RP there are so many good lenses and we need to remind ourselves that the lens matters more than the body. There are so many sharp and fast full frame lenses but so few for apsc. Also I dun think it will ever change as Canon wants buyers to move up the food chain and not get stuck as apsc.
I’ve rented an RP and I do recall being pleasantly surprised with the solid-feeling build. Battery life is where I would hesitate. I might choose the older EOS R with the bigger battery…
R7 in landscape for example, gives you higher resolution better for big prints and bigger depth of field. When you want to have depth of field like ff in f11 it is enough to use f6.3 and you don't have to use so high ISO like in ff in case of wind. That is why lots of pro photographers uses crop cameras e.g. xt-3, xt-4.
That Neil Breen cameo was cherry on the top of this video :D
I just bought an EOS RP body for $599 directly from Canon USA with free shipping. The EF EOS-R cost another $99. My EF glass works flawlessly with the RP. This was no-brainer choice and a great upgrade from a T2i body and lighter and better built also.
I sold my 6D mark ii and bought R7 to eneter in to ML. R7 is much advanced. Image quality of R7 is not better than 6D Mii. A full frame is a full frame for general , portrait and wedding etc but for wildlife yes R7 is amaazing. General photography in R7 can be better if you buy a fast zoom lense which is going to cost double the rate of R7 body. R7 is fully okay for a general phootographer. Its a much much advanced Apsc camera.
As I mentioned on another video my first digital camera was the EOS 10D with a EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM. I had no clue one way or the other of cropped or full frame sensors. I was happy with my little camera and took many memorable photos while I was in college; tailgate parties, football games, watch parties, etc. I became the de facto photographer for the student origination that I belonged to. I would share my photos with the secretary of our org and she would upload them to the Facebook page.
They were, as was I, impressed by the images. They asked me if I made any edits and I told them it was right out of the camera.
When I decided to upgrade to an EOS 5D that what I had was cropped sensor. I decided to keep the 10D and I bought the 5D any way. Later on I traded the 5D and upgraded to the 5DMk II and what a difference that made. I still have the 5DMkII and it shares space in my camera bag with the EOS R.
I gave my wife the 10D. She's intuitively a much better photographer than I am. Next to her photos mine look like snapshots from a disposable film camera. So we traded in the 10D and I bought her a 40D. That still wasn't good enough so now she has the EOS RP and her photos are absolutely stunning.
So now she takes photos and I lug around the equipment, setup and tear down. She shoots macro of the flowers and insects in our backyard garden.
If you're new to photography like I was and completely uninformed about cropped or full frame as I was you'll have a lot of fun with the crop sensor and you will unknowingly make the adjustments in framing your shots for those amazing photos you'll be taking.
For that small niche group of us doing stop-motion animation, it has never been a better time to pick up a second-hand EOS RP. Thanks for the comparison.
This is honestly a little surprising to me - but at the same time, the experience that I can compare with featured a much bigger difference between the full frame and APSC cameras. I started with a Sony a6000, and once I started specializing in astrophotography I ended up getting an a7s, which was released the same year and meant to be a truly premium option, at least for video and low-light. Then, I upgraded to the a7III, which has similar low-light performance but lightyears-better autofocus performance.
My opinion has always been that, for landscape astrophotography, you will almost always be better off with a full-frame camera for the same price. And I think that if you were to look at the used market, the price difference would be more substantial. But if you're looking at brand-new cameras, the APSC camera may just be the choice with better image quality.
Hello Chris! I usually love your reviews but this one begs a lot of questions. Which lens do you use for the sharpness test? Why don't you show the raw results for noise? In my experience with the same tier/price of lenses the RP waaay overresolves even the 32MP canon sensors. Also low light RAW image quality seems about half a stop better in my testing and also DPR shows this (which is still a great achievement from the R7 btw, since it should be 1,5 stop worse just by sensor size).
Sharpness test on a Sigma 40mm ART lens, stopped down to f/4 - this virtually is the sharpest optic possible.
I have X-T3 for couple years and had a chance to use RP. It feels like a cheap plastic toy in my hands compared to X-T3, and I was afraid to break it. But it's such lightweight and I can easily see myself buying RP as an budget full frame spare body for travel and hiking photography. Unfortunately, Canon's policy on third party lenses pretty much nullifies advantages of RP.
OK, so I switched to EOS R for my first delve into mirrorless from my Nikon life. I love the EOS R. I have invested in R lenses. the 24-105 L f4 and the 15 to 30 R L. Both great lenses. So I then thought I needed a back up camera. The EOS RP. Rather liking this camera small light, and easy to use. Yes the R7 is great but I have invested now and I am not disappoined.
Thanks for the video, you previously tested the sigma 17-50 F2.8 lens. Would this be a good combo for the R7 due to the lack of APSC options currently available
Well, for many ppl, only the plain Sensor size counts, which is insane, in fact. A camera is so much more, than just the Sensor yet alone. Those folks also buy a PC only according to the installed CPU, but not counting the sum of all parts into, hence bios, avialable expansion slots, PSU quality, DIMM quality and size, same goes for the graphics card, the CPU Cooler, the PC case, and so on....and one reason, i only use self build rigs since decades. As for the camera, it is analog also so much more, than only the Sensor, but quality of AF system, AF points, how sensitive is the AF system, how many fps possible, -tracking functionality, how many memory card slots (usually two), which memory card support, avialable lenses for the mount system, how old is the Sensor and Frontend LSI, etc, etc....
I'd like to hear "35mm Format", it's technically just small picture format, hence "Kleinbildformat", 35mm (135) into germany, instead of this B$ marketing moniker "FF, or -fullframe", since every Sensor is literally "fullframe", as long as the output isn't being cropped. I can only recommand that Zack Arias Video "Crop or Crap?!" Video since 2014, which gained some cult status since it's release.
This was done >2 decades ago only, to show parity with the 35mm Film format, when 2001 (it was being avialable a bit later into 2002) CONTAX introduced the mighty N1 digital, equipped with the FTF-3020-C 6 MP 35mm (36x24mm) Philips Sensor. See here: www.dpreview.com/articles/3315211933/contaxn1digital
I do prefer a high end DX/APS-C camera, compared to a entry level 35mm DSLM. For the following reasons 1) Speed and better, matured AF system 2) weather sealing 3) build quality 4) into general, more speedy and better, than a typical entry level 35mm DSLM 5) two memory card slots, instead of usually only one into 36x34mm entry 35mm level bodies 5) the DR advantage from 36x24mm entry level digital cameras is usually using a older Sensor, than the current (high end) tech & models, therefore negledible difference compared to newer APS-C/DX Sensor generations, which is usually 1 to 1 1/2 stops better IQ. 6) For wildlife & birders, big zooms are way lighter, and worlds cheaper, than their uber-expensive 35mm counterparts...an 600mm F4 L USM RF costs like 13K, which is insane, for an enthusiast, or advanced amateur shooter, but for working pros, quite ordinary. I do also own two older 35mm setups, but for usually bright, sunny days, or overcast, APS-C/DX is just good enough.
The biggest advantage from the 35mm Sensor is, more DoF, compared to APS-C/DX, and better lowlight capabilities, hence more DR, than the physical smaller Sensor. A F2.8 Zoom via APS-C/DX Sensor (x1.52 Cropfactor, (Nikon, Pentax, Sony, usually 23.6x15.6mm, Canons APS-C Sensor is a fraction smaller, with x1.6 to 1.61 Cropfactor) behaves like F4 via DoF on a 35mm 36x24mm Sensor. Physically, they're both F2.8 then, but not from Depth of Field.
Eagerly waiting for Canon R7's review with Sigma 18-35 mm F1.8 and sigma 50-100 f1.8 as these lenses were bit ahead of a time when they were launched for APS-C Camera's, at least a lot better than canon APS-C lenses.
Thanks a lot for this wonderful comparison Chris. Learnt a few things...
Don’t wait. If you like those lenses, buy the R7 now. I’ve been using the 18-35 for several years, and the R7 has now supercharged it. IBIS and the AF performance just rock. I borrowed the 50-100 from a friend for a shoot a couple of weeks ago. For all the whining about crop sensors and bokeh . . . BOOM, problem solved. Yes, I have FF cameras and f/1.4 primes; so, I know what that looks like. At about $1000, the 50-100 f/1.8 is a no-brainer for portrait work.
@@Mariner1460 Heartiest thanks David for sharing your experience.
Full frame is SO much better in low light. Tried apsc Sony and Fujifilm vs Canon and Sony full frame. No contest. For lo light full frame 100%
RP vs R10 could be an interesting comparison, since they're nearly identical in size and price.
Another great video!!! I have an rp, the only thing I feel im missing out on is the burst rate. I'm actually considering M6 mkii as my next camera for a backup and occasional sports camera. How do you feel it compares to the r7? I admit I still lean towards budget gear.
Current M6II owner here, hoping to snag an R7 at a good price this Black Friday. I took a gamble with a newish Ebay user selling it with tons of equipment bundled in, and scored a great price.
The main reason for me switching is because of the neglected EF-M system. Everyone but Sigma seems to have forgotten about it, and the introduction of RF-S was the last nail in it's coffin. Some of the rumored RF-S lenses like the 16-55 2.8 would replace my aging Sigma 17-50 2.8.
IBIS on the R7 is also a good selling point for me, since I can get away with using more non-IS lenses, which are cheaper.
The body is too small for carrying big lenses to be comfortable, so more often than not I have a SmallRig cage on it to give my fingers some relief, which hopefully I don't need for the R7 because of its much larger grip. Sigma's 16 and 56mm lenses are a great fit for it, but for everything else I'm using a speed booster or an adapter for EF lenses. With Canon cracking down on third party lens manufacturers, I'm probably going to have to use a speed booster or adapter most of the time anyways for EF lenses.
I also have a CBG battery grip for long shoots, as the normal batteries only last about two and a half hours whereas I can get almost a whole day out of a single pair of 18650 batteries. The R7 uses the standard LP-E6 battery, which will help keep things consistent with everyone else's gear.
Don't get me wrong though, it takes great photos and videos, but it costs too much to make relatively usable for my specific needs.
TL;DR: The R7 is a much more refined solution for my needs, despite the future of RF lens development being rather concerning.
I own an M50 MK II as my sole camera. Used it to shoot my sons football for a whole season and it worked brilliantly with the 55-200
The M6 would be as good or better you won't be disappointed
Great review !
Really enjoyed your lens reviews for the EOS-M series.
For me, I see no need to upgrade my M50 MK II just yet.
I love my M50 but I don't like where Canon is going. They are turning into the Apple of cameras. Always a feature missing and if you want that feature you either compromise or buy another additional camera.
I shoot all sorts from football matches to landscape so I need a do-it-all and currently the M50 is plenty good
lack of lenses is the main flaw of eos-m
@RockMusicVideoReviewer negative. I own 8 EF-M native lenses ans 4 EF lenses (adapted) and never had a scenario I couldn't cater for. The lenses on the EOS-M are brilliant. You don't need 5 versions of basically the same lens. The lenses aren't that many (native) but they cover just about everything.
I don't shoot alot of low light except street photography and family shots occassionally and for that, the 32 f1.4, Sigma 16 f.14 and Sigma 56 f1.4 is more than enough.
Otherwise, it's mainly daytime shots and most for that, the EOS-M lenses are superb
@@thetoyota86perspective54 You are just one person who has a set of needs that are fulfilled by the M lens choices.
@@rockmusicvideoreviewer896 cool story
If you can't get good photos with the EF-M line-up then the problem isn't the camera
@@thetoyota86perspective54 nobody ever said that the M camera can't take good photos. That's a lame response. You're missing the entire point. Back to my point, there's not even anything like a 16-50mm f2.8 with auto focus for the system. the most popular lens.
I have the R7 and RP, and I have no plans to sell either. The RP high ISO is better by about a stop, but the dynamic range of the R7 is actually a little better when pulling shadows in still images. If you already have some nice EF or EF-S lenses like sigma ART, then the R7 is an easy pick, and the RF primes (35mm, 50mm, and 85mm) are recommended and essentially have a built in 1.6X teleconverter when used on the R7. If you generally want shallower DOF and wider field of view, then go with the RP.