WOW! That R6II is a beast. There’s a wild life photographer on TH-cam that tested the R7. He was missing focus when he didn’t think he should. He sent his camera to Canon. They told him his camera was fine. The problem was just a limitation of the camera. I think he reduced his capture rate to 8Fps and his hit rate improved. That may be why Sony caps their’s at 11, even for electronic shutter. Thanks for the test Phil.
Thank you! That's an interesting theory about why Sony caps theirs at 11. I've considered that as well. There was one situation where I wanted maximum FPS but didn't use autofocus at all. For that, having more than 11 FPS was very useful so I used the 30 FPS mode on the R7 but in most situations, 11 FPS is plenty for me.
Duade Paton is the Australian bird photographer referred to here. Canon was very clear; the relatively slow R7 sensor struggles with faster frame rates, which compromises AF performance. This probably explains why many of us didn't complain about the "wandering AF" problem Duade described in an earlier video. While Canon should probably have been more transparent about this limitation from the get go, I am perfectly happy with 7-15 fps, where the AF performs well.
Thanks for the great video as always! I put in my pre-order for the a6700 right after watching this video. Will be my first real camera, thanks for the help deciding!
Tough call, but I think I'll go for A6700 at some point as I already have GM 100-400. I'd prefer ergonomics of a Canon, but no third party lenses is hard to swallow. Actually it's not even lack of third party, but Canon doesn't offer any nice lenses for APS-C of their own. Also my colleague recently had some issues with weather sealing on the bottom side of R7 and had to pay around 500$ for board replacement. It was not covered by warranty.
Thank you! I've found that I actually like the ergonomics of the a6700. It feels really good and comfortable in my hands. I can tell you from experience, if you knock an R7 off of your tripod and into a creek, you will kill it. LOL
@@PhilThach Yeah, I was really sad about your damaged camera :( I wonder if this grip that is available for A7CII and A7RC will be also available for A6700. This should help a bit with a pinky finger.
Glad to see the R7 did as well as it did. Would be interesting to redo the test with electronic first curtain. I've been using that lately and having better luck than full electric, especially with no wobbles. That plus 100-500 can't be beat in terms of weight and reach. It's worth the extra money over the Sony gear you tested, for me at least.
Mixed bag here. Comparing ff to crop and lenses with a huge price difference. You should used the 100-400 GM to the Canon 100-500. The sony lens also sports a more precise and faster AF and just alot more microcontrast and clearity. I dont really know what to choose here tbh
Thanks for doing the comparison Phil! I have the A7iv and the R7 and R8 and I believe the Sony autofocus and the R8's autofocus is a bit more stable and sticky than the R7's also. I never hold down my shutter button long enough to fill the buffer shooting c-raw with any of the cameras so that's not an issue with me even at Hi+ burst. I do make settings adjustments to the autofocus and the sliders to try to optimize each of the systems and it does seem to help a lot. I'm able to adapt my EF wildlife primes to my Sony and Canon cameras and I'm getting lots of beautiful results from both systems.
Thanks, Forrest! I rarely hit the buffer but, if there is a tiny bird that I've been trying to get in the frame for a while and it finally sits still and in a place in the thicket that I can shoot through, I'll shoot a full buffer with the R7 and maybe a6700. Certainly not the R6 Mark II.
Thanks Phil. That was fun. I'm thinking about the R7 as a complement to my R5. I know it's slower but it is lighter and I like the crop factor. I might rent one to try on my 100-500 and my 200-400 F4 1.4TC. I'll let you know if I do. Again thanks and Happy Easter.
After owning the R7 for a bit I ended up buying the R6 mk2. I mostly photograph birds around our property and have the 100-500 and the 800F11. I just cannot fall in love with the R6mk2. Every time I have some great shots I get back to the PC only to be disappointed with the lack of resolution compared to the R7. I have done some low light portraits and the R6mk2 is amazing there but for bird photography the R7 has spoiled me. Sure it misses focus here and there but there is always enough good photos to pick from.
Really appreciate what you put out mate! I was leaning on a 6700 over R7, I admit, but this clinched it! As you rightly mentioned the choice of lenses is phenomenal, so thanks again!
Interesting that you ask about Landscape photography. I'd say both would be about equal for landscape work. The R7 has higher resolution while I like the APSC lens selection better for the a6700 but the R7 will be getting sigma lenses soon so that even s that up. This video is really more about bird photography. The R6 Mark II is full frame so that's a whole different world.
Thank you! Seeing as how, the Z 50 does not have bird eye detect, probably not very good. But I guess I could do it the old-fashioned way with the Z 50 and put single point focus on the Birds Eye. I’m sure I will repeat a test similar to this when and if Nikon ever makes a bird eye detect Auto focusing APSC camera.
@@PhilThach Its a real shame that Nikon doesn't get their game together and make good affordable cameras like they used to with the DSLR line. If I find a windfall in funds I maybe moving to Canon. You an Heather's bird photos have me chomping at the bit to get an R7.
Great video and thamk you for taking the time to do all comparison worm. I own 7Dii, R7, and Sony A6600. I can say A6600 and R7 AF is one another planet to my 7Dii. The R7 Eye AF is quicker and more sticky than the A6600. What have found out is the A6600 and R7 sensors have a very similar Read out speed. In this video the R7 has the slower sensor and I believe this shows in the results. When the R7ii comes I will trade in my R7 in a flash. Canon IMO just cobbled an APSC mirrorless camera together with what they had available quickly. Hence why the R7 has the tweaked D90 and not a new sensor, and the results show this !
Thanks, I like your video's a lot. I own Nikon, Canon and had also Sony till a few months ago. I had a Sony A7M4 with the Sony 200-600 lens but I almost always chose my Canon R6M II from the moment I bought that body. I really love that camera combined with the Canon R 70-200 f4. I take lot of photo's from dogs in action and also love bird photography, it hardly ever misses a shot and the noise is so much less than form the Sony A7M4. Keep up your good work, I really love that you also like different brands. So many people don't understand that 🙂
Interesting comment about the noise. What kind of noise? Are you finding less details in Canon vs Sony? I’ve red somewhere that Canon is baking in the noise reduction, even in RAWs…
Hi Phil, i recently picked up the A6700 and really liking it. After watching this test did you have noise reduction in camera activated? If so what was it set to? Do you generally recommend turning off noise reduction in camera? Thanks Phil
Interesting static test. Sometimes I wonder if the barely missed focus shots are related to stabilization. Comparing the R7 to cameras I've had in the past, the R7 is miles better. I personally don't sweat the odd shots that aren't tack sharp, or a blurry mess for that matter. I doubt many people would notice near misses if you post them to social media. The Sony and R6II seem like great options.
Thank you! I still love my R7 and I agree, that missing 4 in a batch of 54 isn't a big deal. Still, the other two didn't miss any so that makes it more notable. I'd still pick the R7 if I could only have 1.
Good video Phil. I would be comfortable out in the field with any of these. I like my R7 for the reasons you state, size, weight, ergonomics in hand. What I see as good news is, while there is no single camera that runs away from the field, all are good cameras. It really comes down to what attributes better suit each photographer. It does make the buying decision somewhat perplexing. After all the research I did, I think I would have been just as well served if I had pasted an ad for each comparable camera on my wall, closed my eyes, turned around 3 times and threw a dart buying the one the dart came closest to. They really do seem to be that close.
I’ve been shooting with the a6700 and the Sony G Master 100-400. I’m having excellent results with this combination. 1.5 x 400 = 600 mm. I also have the Sony 200-600mm, as you do, but it’s a bit on the heavy side for me. When I got my first Sony 200-600, is was soft. So, I returned it for another copy. The second copy, and the one I use now, is very sharp. Maybe consider returning your 200-600, for a different copy, or send it in to Sony for adjustments.
@@PhilThach yes, I wasn't thinking, I didn't want to lash out £3000 so use an EF100-400lii. I am just disappointed with the number of soft images when using Sigma lenses. I did look at a Sony A7r v but the light was poor and they looked terrible. Not to mention file size in Photoshop of 178mb! I still wonder about the benefit of a high mp sensor when most lenses resolve mid 20's mp.
Hi Phil - very impressed with your channel - liked and subscribed! Would you be willing to make a new camera menu settings video for the Sony a6700 for photographing birds - in flight and stationary?
Thank you! That is something that I may do in the future. But, I can tell you I'm going with 1 on tracking sensitivity for perched birds, and for birds in flight, I use 4 or 5. I'm still attempting to figure out the best settings but this is how I'm currently leaning.
Thanks for the test. Interesting. When using 30 fps electronic shutter on the R7, I mostly get 60% sharp. I need to adjust it to 15 fps electronic shutter to raise the hit rate. Hopefully it will get up to 90%. R5 is way better even at 45 mp at 20 fps electronic shutter, mostly above 90% hit rate.
Thank you! I've always used the 15 FPS speed just so I don't overload my hard drive and so I can shoot a little longer before I hit the buffer. It was a lucky coincidence for me that it also might help with auto-focus.
Awesome! I have a question, I'm an aircraft spotter and I would like to buy a camera por doing photos and videos of them, very important, doing photos and videos of them at day and night. Between the Sony a6700 and the Canon R7, what would you recommend for this?
Great video; maybe we're getting the R7 problems narrowed down thanks to you and others... It looks like ESFC is the way I'm going from now on; 8 FPS with high speed continuous is very good for me, and because the buffer fills up slower one can get about 145 frames... Every shot will be sharp in a controlled test; I know cause I tried it, thanks to your procedure... Hopefully Canon can do a firmware update to fix this readout speed; maybe not but I'm still hoping... This is one of the very best videos I've seen about frame rates and their impact on image quality... Thanks again...
Thank you! I agree they are both good. I'd love to do a flying bird test but it would be very difficult to find a controlled situation. That's why I used a fake cardinal, it was the only way I could assure the same conditions for each camera. Even with the fake bird, the light could have changed slightly between each set of shots so even this test isn't perfect. I did try to make my shots with each camera as close together as possible.
I got that speed from Tony Northrups video. It seems about right considering it still has a notable amount of rolling shutter distortion. Where have you seen these reports?
From the DPReview a6700 review - "The new sensor shoots at the same 11fps as the previous generation of cameras, but now has the option to shoot at 11fps with electronic shutter, if you want 1/8000 sec shutter speeds, for instance. We found the rolling shutter to be fairly significant if you shoot Raw (around 64ms / 1/16 sec), but significantly faster in JPEG-only mode at around 25ms (1/40 sec), which is likely to mean a drop to 12-bit readout." I did not know that the sensor readout is different for RAW and JPG modes..
@@PhilThach When shooting video Gerald Undone and some other ones reported the rolling shutter to be 16ms. That was the number I've been hearing. I havent thought about the rolling shutter when shooting pictures because there is not as much reasons to use electronic shutter . Super interesting numbers of the readout speeds when shooting RAW and JPEGs, thanks for the information. It would be great if you can do a video on comparing the readout speads for pictures in detail.
Sorry to say, but this test is far from resembling real-life challenges of C-AF. It just tests stability of the focus. What would be relevant is lock-on time, ability to detect subject partially obscured or in front of busy background, ability to track a bird in flight across focal plane, ability to track a target approaching a camera straight-on, diagonally or in wavy line. This kind of stuff. This was basically a buffer/drive mode performance test.
Thank you. "It just tests stability of focus". Yes, that's what I was testing because the R7 has been shown to have some troubles with that, especially in low light and I wanted to see if my other cameras did as well. I threw in the buffer demonstration for free. I agree, testing those other things would be good but doing it in a controlled situation, especially the BIF tests would be beyond my capabilities.
I know a lot of people who use those and I'm sure there are many benefits including protecting the lens and stealth. I don't use them because I want the lens I'm using to be easily identifiable for my viewers.
Hi good job and you got some stamina with reviewing all those photos LOL. If you get bored you can place your Fake bird on something rotating like duade paton did in his tests. Might be closer to areal world scenario
It a shame that Nikon isn’t in the competition, since I believe they offer the best and affordable wildlife lenses between Sony and Canon. But Nikon has fallen behind their competition (Sony and Canon) when it come to mid-range and APSC cameras offering with fast AF.
Maybe Nikon will announce the D500 successor sometime soon. I'm on the waiting list for the 180-600 just so I will have it when the Z90 or whatever they call it comes out. They could use the Sony a6700 sensor and make an APSC camera with bird eye-detect right now. That would be maybe a Z70. I'd buy it immediately and still buy a Z90 when and if they ever make one of those.
I think the R7 was a disappointment to former 7D shooters in a number of areas. I'm so happy with my R5 that I'm not even jealous of the R6 mk II. I am still hoping for some of that R6 performance to trickle down (up?) to the R5, but even so, I doubt if I'll trade in for the eventual R5 mk II. I agree about the Rf 100-500; it's terrific!
Thanks so much for this video! I just got my a6700 this weekend and I find so far that the a6700 with the 200-600 does a much better job than the R7 with the 100-400 or the 800mm f/11. I took about 800 shots with the a6700 and not a single one was out of focus. The R7 does a good job but the a6700 just seems better to me so far with my limited experience. Cheers.
Sounds impressive!! But do use third party lenses for your sony a6700? I am curious about the autofocus performance in third party lens, Because i just order the sony a6700 and i planned to pair it with the samyang 24-70 f2.8 do you think i should do it?
@@aufakhayri7502 Many of the lenses I have for my Sony are 3rd party in the Canon EF mount and I use the Sigma adapter which works well for me. I got Canon EF mount lenses so I can use them on my other camera bodies as well. My experience is that native Sony lenses do better overall especially when it comes to stabilization. You can also use focus breathing compensation with bodies that support it. I do have some Samyang prime lenses for Sony and overall they seem to work well just not as well as the Sony lenses. I think the a6700 and the Samyang 24-70 would serve you well. This is just my 2 cents maybe others have a different experience or point of view.
I'm happy with mine as well. I don't think I could make 800 real world photos of living subjects and get all of them sharp with any of these cameras so you are doing very well!
I have the Samyang 35-150 for my a6700 and have been very happy with the autofocus. I photographed a college soccer match with it. The video about it should come out in the first week or two of October.
With Canon cameras, you can use the EF to RF adapter and then have access to the vast array of Canon EF and 3rd party lenses. I have an R7 and use a lot of EF lenses and even a Tamron fisheye.
That's a good point. I have the adaptor and use an old EF-S 10-18 as my ultra-wide for my R7. There are several videos featuring that here on the channel. But, for the a6700 there are 4 different 1st party ultra-wides available plus countless third party options that can be used without an adapter. I can also get an MC 11 adapter and use that Canon EF-S 10-18 and the vast array of third party lenses for Canon that you mentioned on the a6700.
WOW! That R6II is a beast. There’s a wild life photographer on TH-cam that tested the R7. He was missing focus when he didn’t think he should. He sent his camera to Canon. They told him his camera was fine. The problem was just a limitation of the camera. I think he reduced his capture rate to 8Fps and his hit rate improved. That may be why Sony caps their’s at 11, even for electronic shutter. Thanks for the test Phil.
Thank you! That's an interesting theory about why Sony caps theirs at 11. I've considered that as well. There was one situation where I wanted maximum FPS but didn't use autofocus at all. For that, having more than 11 FPS was very useful so I used the 30 FPS mode on the R7 but in most situations, 11 FPS is plenty for me.
Duade Paton is the Australian bird photographer referred to here. Canon was very clear; the relatively slow R7 sensor struggles with faster frame rates, which compromises AF performance. This probably explains why many of us didn't complain about the "wandering AF" problem Duade described in an earlier video. While Canon should probably have been more transparent about this limitation from the get go, I am perfectly happy with 7-15 fps, where the AF performs well.
@@wellingtoncrescent2480 yes, Duade Paton was the photographer. I couldn’t remember his name. He did an excellent job testing the camera.
Thanks for the great video as always! I put in my pre-order for the a6700 right after watching this video. Will be my first real camera, thanks for the help deciding!
Thank you very much and congratulations your a6700!
Tough call, but I think I'll go for A6700 at some point as I already have GM 100-400. I'd prefer ergonomics of a Canon, but no third party lenses is hard to swallow. Actually it's not even lack of third party, but Canon doesn't offer any nice lenses for APS-C of their own. Also my colleague recently had some issues with weather sealing on the bottom side of R7 and had to pay around 500$ for board replacement. It was not covered by warranty.
Thank you! I've found that I actually like the ergonomics of the a6700. It feels really good and comfortable in my hands. I can tell you from experience, if you knock an R7 off of your tripod and into a creek, you will kill it. LOL
@@PhilThach Yeah, I was really sad about your damaged camera :( I wonder if this grip that is available for A7CII and A7RC will be also available for A6700. This should help a bit with a pinky finger.
@@PhilThach Man, I've just discovered the ClearImage Zoom function on my a6400. Will explore that for video soon :) Check this also on your a6700.
Glad to see the R7 did as well as it did. Would be interesting to redo the test with electronic first curtain. I've been using that lately and having better luck than full electric, especially with no wobbles. That plus 100-500 can't be beat in terms of weight and reach. It's worth the extra money over the Sony gear you tested, for me at least.
Thank you! I like the idea of getting rid of the wobbles with the EFCS! I agree and I'm starting to see why the 100-500 costs so much.
Mixed bag here. Comparing ff to crop and lenses with a huge price difference. You should used the 100-400 GM to the Canon 100-500. The sony lens also sports a more precise and faster AF and just alot more microcontrast and clearity. I dont really know what to choose here tbh
Thanks for doing the comparison Phil! I have the A7iv and the R7 and R8 and I believe the Sony autofocus and the R8's autofocus is a bit more stable and sticky than the R7's also. I never hold down my shutter button long enough to fill the buffer shooting c-raw with any of the cameras so that's not an issue with me even at Hi+ burst. I do make settings adjustments to the autofocus and the sliders to try to optimize each of the systems and it does seem to help a lot. I'm able to adapt my EF wildlife primes to my Sony and Canon cameras and I'm getting lots of beautiful results from both systems.
Thanks, Forrest! I rarely hit the buffer but, if there is a tiny bird that I've been trying to get in the frame for a while and it finally sits still and in a place in the thicket that I can shoot through, I'll shoot a full buffer with the R7 and maybe a6700. Certainly not the R6 Mark II.
Great test Phil and some interesting results. They’re all very good cameras. Thanks for sharing the results 👍
Thank you, Adrain!
Thanks Phil. That was fun. I'm thinking about the R7 as a complement to my R5. I know it's slower but it is lighter and I like the crop factor. I might rent one to try on my 100-500 and my 200-400 F4 1.4TC. I'll let you know if I do. Again thanks and Happy Easter.
Thank you!
After owning the R7 for a bit I ended up buying the R6 mk2. I mostly photograph birds around our property and have the 100-500 and the 800F11. I just cannot fall in love with the R6mk2. Every time I have some great shots I get back to the PC only to be disappointed with the lack of resolution compared to the R7. I have done some low light portraits and the R6mk2 is amazing there but for bird photography the R7 has spoiled me. Sure it misses focus here and there but there is always enough good photos to pick from.
I agree! The R7 is a much better camera for bird photography than the R6 mark II even with it's much smaller buffer and occasional misses.
a6700 is the best for it.
Really appreciate what you put out mate! I was leaning on a 6700 over R7, I admit, but this clinched it! As you rightly mentioned the choice of lenses is phenomenal, so thanks again!
Thank you!
Team, Many Thanks so in long run, which you think is better for landscape photography ? Many Thanks
Interesting that you ask about Landscape photography. I'd say both would be about equal for landscape work. The R7 has higher resolution while I like the APSC lens selection better for the a6700 but the R7 will be getting sigma lenses soon so that even s that up. This video is really more about bird photography. The R6 Mark II is full frame so that's a whole different world.
Thank you for taking the time to do this test. I wonder how the Nikon Z50, FTX and 200-500 would do in this same test.
Thank you! Seeing as how, the Z 50 does not have bird eye detect, probably not very good. But I guess I could do it the old-fashioned way with the Z 50 and put single point focus on the Birds Eye. I’m sure I will repeat a test similar to this when and if Nikon ever makes a bird eye detect Auto focusing APSC camera.
@@PhilThach Its a real shame that Nikon doesn't get their game together and make good affordable cameras like they used to with the DSLR line. If I find a windfall in funds I maybe moving to Canon. You an Heather's bird photos have me chomping at the bit to get an R7.
Great video and thamk you for taking the time to do all comparison worm.
I own 7Dii, R7, and Sony A6600.
I can say A6600 and R7 AF is one another planet to my 7Dii.
The R7 Eye AF is quicker and more sticky than the A6600.
What have found out is the A6600 and R7 sensors have a very similar Read out speed.
In this video the R7 has the slower sensor and I believe this shows in the results.
When the R7ii comes I will trade in my R7 in a flash. Canon IMO just cobbled an APSC mirrorless camera together with what they had available quickly. Hence why the R7 has the tweaked D90 and not a new sensor, and the results show this !
Thank you! I would be on an R7 Mark II in an instant as well!
Thanks, I like your video's a lot. I own Nikon, Canon and had also Sony till a few months ago. I had a Sony A7M4 with the Sony 200-600 lens but I almost always chose my Canon R6M II from the moment I bought that body. I really love that camera combined with the Canon R 70-200 f4. I take lot of photo's from dogs in action and also love bird photography, it hardly ever misses a shot and the noise is so much less than form the Sony A7M4. Keep up your good work, I really love that you also like different brands. So many people don't understand that 🙂
Thank you! Some viewers get upset with me when I experiment with other brands so I really appreciate your comment!
Interesting comment about the noise. What kind of noise? Are you finding less details in Canon vs Sony? I’ve red somewhere that Canon is baking in the noise reduction, even in RAWs…
Thanks so much for sharing another wonderful video like always Phil and a great comparation 👍🤗
Thank you!
Hi Phil, i recently picked up the A6700 and really liking it. After watching this test did you have noise reduction in camera activated? If so what was it set to? Do you generally recommend turning off noise reduction in camera? Thanks Phil
I shoot in raw so noise reduction in camera has no effect on my files.
@@PhilThach Thanks for the quick reply Phil! My 10000 iso images are alot more noisy. Are you still liking the a6700?
Interesting static test. Sometimes I wonder if the barely missed focus shots are related to stabilization. Comparing the R7 to cameras I've had in the past, the R7 is miles better. I personally don't sweat the odd shots that aren't tack sharp, or a blurry mess for that matter. I doubt many people would notice near misses if you post them to social media.
The Sony and R6II seem like great options.
Thank you! I still love my R7 and I agree, that missing 4 in a batch of 54 isn't a big deal. Still, the other two didn't miss any so that makes it more notable. I'd still pick the R7 if I could only have 1.
thank you for spending time to make a good useful and especially highly informative video
Thank you!
Good video Phil. I would be comfortable out in the field with any of these. I like my R7 for the reasons you state, size, weight, ergonomics in hand. What I see as good news is, while there is no single camera that runs away from the field, all are good cameras. It really comes down to what attributes better suit each photographer. It does make the buying decision somewhat perplexing. After all the research I did, I think I would have been just as well served if I had pasted an ad for each comparable camera on my wall, closed my eyes, turned around 3 times and threw a dart buying the one the dart came closest to. They really do seem to be that close.
Thank you, Jeff! I’m glad you’re happy with your R7!
Fantastic Phil. Very interested in this Mano y Mano comparison. Thanks. Your conclusions are the Cherry coke I’m looking forward on. 😊
Thank you, Robert!
I’ve been shooting with the a6700 and the Sony G Master 100-400. I’m having excellent results with this combination. 1.5 x 400 = 600 mm. I also have the Sony 200-600mm, as you do, but it’s a bit on the heavy side for me. When I got my first Sony 200-600, is was soft. So, I returned it for another copy. The second copy, and the one I use now, is very sharp. Maybe consider returning your 200-600, for a different copy, or send it in to Sony for adjustments.
Thank you!
Have you thought about getting a MC 11 adapter and using the 100-500 on the Sony? I am pondering that so I get better results with my 150-600 Sigma.
I have thought about getting an MC 11 but it wouldn't adapt the my 100-500 lens, it only adapts the older EF lenses not RF like my 100-500 is.
@@PhilThach yes, I wasn't thinking, I didn't want to lash out £3000 so use an EF100-400lii. I am just disappointed with the number of soft images when using Sigma lenses. I did look at a Sony A7r v but the light was poor and they looked terrible. Not to mention file size in Photoshop of 178mb! I still wonder about the benefit of a high mp sensor when most lenses resolve mid 20's mp.
Well done test! Thank you!
Thank you!
Hi Phil - very impressed with your channel - liked and subscribed! Would you be willing to make a new camera menu settings video for the Sony a6700 for photographing birds - in flight and stationary?
Thank you! That is something that I may do in the future. But, I can tell you I'm going with 1 on tracking sensitivity for perched birds, and for birds in flight, I use 4 or 5. I'm still attempting to figure out the best settings but this is how I'm currently leaning.
Good and fair test. My R7 miss some two and this test show that also.
Thank you!
Thanks Phil, very interesting!
Thank you!
Thanks for the test. Interesting. When using 30 fps electronic shutter on the R7, I mostly get 60% sharp. I need to adjust it to 15 fps electronic shutter to raise the hit rate. Hopefully it will get up to 90%. R5 is way better even at 45 mp at 20 fps electronic shutter, mostly above 90% hit rate.
Thank you! I've always used the 15 FPS speed just so I don't overload my hard drive and so I can shoot a little longer before I hit the buffer. It was a lucky coincidence for me that it also might help with auto-focus.
Hi Phil, would be interesting to see if Heather's R7 miss focus any images within a burst mode, just a thought.
That's an interesting thought. She experiences similar successes and struggles with her R7 to what I do.
Awesome! I have a question, I'm an aircraft spotter and I would like to buy a camera por doing photos and videos of them, very important, doing photos and videos of them at day and night. Between the Sony a6700 and the Canon R7, what would you recommend for this?
I would think that both of those cameras would be very good at that and I don’t really have one that I would think would be better than the other one.
One of the camera has cockpit targeting - I think its a Canon maybe r6ii… not sure about it but look up!
Great video; maybe we're getting the R7 problems narrowed down thanks to you and others... It looks like ESFC is the way I'm going from now on; 8 FPS with high speed continuous is very good for me, and because the buffer fills up slower one can get about 145 frames... Every shot will be sharp in a controlled test; I know cause I tried it, thanks to your procedure... Hopefully Canon can do a firmware update to fix this readout speed; maybe not but I'm still hoping... This is one of the very best videos I've seen about frame rates and their impact on image quality... Thanks again...
Thank you, John!
Nicely done. Would like to see the results on real world flying birds. Both cameras are just damn good.
Thank you! I agree they are both good. I'd love to do a flying bird test but it would be very difficult to find a controlled situation. That's why I used a fake cardinal, it was the only way I could assure the same conditions for each camera. Even with the fake bird, the light could have changed slightly between each set of shots so even this test isn't perfect. I did try to make my shots with each camera as close together as possible.
Very useful, Phil!
Thank you!
Have you disabled R7’s lens correction (RF 100-500) and used electronic shutter to have the best high speed shoots performance and stablization?
Lens correction was left on but these are raw files. I used electronic shutter on all cameras.
@@PhilThach Thanks. You are professional.
Canon R7 and R6 have something Sony 6700 doesn't have which is pre-burst mode. I don't understand why Canon doesn't even market this feature.
25ms for the a6700 - is that correct ? I've seen it being reported to be 16ms
I got that speed from Tony Northrups video. It seems about right considering it still has a notable amount of rolling shutter distortion. Where have you seen these reports?
From the DPReview a6700 review - "The new sensor shoots at the same 11fps as the previous generation of cameras, but now has the option to shoot at 11fps with electronic shutter, if you want 1/8000 sec shutter speeds, for instance. We found the rolling shutter to be fairly significant if you shoot Raw (around 64ms / 1/16 sec), but significantly faster in JPEG-only mode at around 25ms (1/40 sec), which is likely to mean a drop to 12-bit readout." I did not know that the sensor readout is different for RAW and JPG modes..
@@PhilThach When shooting video Gerald Undone and some other ones reported the rolling shutter to be 16ms. That was the number I've been hearing. I havent thought about the rolling shutter when shooting pictures because there is not as much reasons to use electronic shutter . Super interesting numbers of the readout speeds when shooting RAW and JPEGs, thanks for the information. It would be great if you can do a video on comparing the readout speads for pictures in detail.
video is basically jpegs in 10 bit, thus it makes sense for the readout to be quicker. I think this information is legit.
Why is the viewfinder in the a6700 looks like jerky and shaky?
Sorry to say, but this test is far from resembling real-life challenges of C-AF. It just tests stability of the focus. What would be relevant is lock-on time, ability to detect subject partially obscured or in front of busy background, ability to track a bird in flight across focal plane, ability to track a target approaching a camera straight-on, diagonally or in wavy line. This kind of stuff. This was basically a buffer/drive mode performance test.
Thank you. "It just tests stability of focus". Yes, that's what I was testing because the R7 has been shown to have some troubles with that, especially in low light and I wanted to see if my other cameras did as well. I threw in the buffer demonstration for free. I agree, testing those other things would be good but doing it in a controlled situation, especially the BIF tests would be beyond my capabilities.
Buy a camo sleeve for the 200-600 lens :) a rolanpro waterproof 😊
I know a lot of people who use those and I'm sure there are many benefits including protecting the lens and stealth. I don't use them because I want the lens I'm using to be easily identifiable for my viewers.
Hi good job and you got some stamina with reviewing all those photos LOL. If you get bored you can place your Fake bird on something rotating like duade paton did in his tests. Might be closer to areal world scenario
That’s a great idea. I might get Heather to slowly move the bird around a little bit and see how the camera does in that situation as well someday.
I knew before hand that R6ii will beat the crap out of this two apsc cameras. Between the R7 and a6700 it is a toss up.
It a shame that Nikon isn’t in the competition, since I believe they offer the best and affordable wildlife lenses between Sony and Canon. But Nikon has fallen behind their competition (Sony and Canon) when it come to mid-range and APSC cameras offering with fast AF.
Agreed, I'm not sure what their hold up is but we need the d500 successor yesterday
Maybe Nikon will announce the D500 successor sometime soon. I'm on the waiting list for the 180-600 just so I will have it when the Z90 or whatever they call it comes out. They could use the Sony a6700 sensor and make an APSC camera with bird eye-detect right now. That would be maybe a Z70. I'd buy it immediately and still buy a Z90 when and if they ever make one of those.
A6700 noise performance at 10000 ISO just crushed the R7. 😮
Result of R7 not surprising as it the slow sensor as you know that causes it to go out of focus every dozen or so shots.
It's still a fantastic camera. I'm very happy with it.
@@PhilThach me too Phil, me too.
I think the R7 was a disappointment to former 7D shooters in a number of areas. I'm so happy with my R5 that I'm not even jealous of the R6 mk II. I am still hoping for some of that R6 performance to trickle down (up?) to the R5, but even so, I doubt if I'll trade in for the eventual R5 mk II. I agree about the Rf 100-500; it's terrific!
Thank you!
Thanks so much for this video! I just got my a6700 this weekend and I find so far that the a6700 with the 200-600 does a much better job than the R7 with the 100-400 or the 800mm f/11. I took about 800 shots with the a6700 and not a single one was out of focus. The R7 does a good job but the a6700 just seems better to me so far with my limited experience. Cheers.
Sounds impressive!!
But do use third party lenses for your sony a6700? I am curious about the autofocus performance in third party lens, Because i just order the sony a6700 and i planned to pair it with the samyang 24-70 f2.8 do you think i should do it?
@@aufakhayri7502 Many of the lenses I have for my Sony are 3rd party in the Canon EF mount and I use the Sigma adapter which works well for me. I got Canon EF mount lenses so I can use them on my other camera bodies as well. My experience is that native Sony lenses do better overall especially when it comes to stabilization. You can also use focus breathing compensation with bodies that support it. I do have some Samyang prime lenses for Sony and overall they seem to work well just not as well as the Sony lenses. I think the a6700 and the Samyang 24-70 would serve you well. This is just my 2 cents maybe others have a different experience or point of view.
I'm happy with mine as well. I don't think I could make 800 real world photos of living subjects and get all of them sharp with any of these cameras so you are doing very well!
I have the Samyang 35-150 for my a6700 and have been very happy with the autofocus. I photographed a college soccer match with it. The video about it should come out in the first week or two of October.
@@PhilThach 🙂 Thanks I was very surprised to be honest.
With Canon cameras, you can use the EF to RF adapter and then have access to the vast array of Canon EF and 3rd party lenses. I have an R7 and use a lot of EF lenses and even a Tamron fisheye.
That's a good point. I have the adaptor and use an old EF-S 10-18 as my ultra-wide for my R7. There are several videos featuring that here on the channel. But, for the a6700 there are 4 different 1st party ultra-wides available plus countless third party options that can be used without an adapter. I can also get an MC 11 adapter and use that Canon EF-S 10-18 and the vast array of third party lenses for Canon that you mentioned on the a6700.
there is a sigma 500f4 sport lens is just brilliant for wild life genres
Those are older lenses and anything new is selfishly, greedily blocked by Canon
Jean-Luc Picardnal 😆
Thank you, Leon!
Just a shame all three have the damn ubiquitous side hinged flippy flappy rear LCD.
I love the flip screen, but I have a TH-cam channel so I actually use it. Thanks for watching!
i am big fan of you sir, you are teacher
Thank you!