R7 for bird photography and birds in flight (5 Viewers)

[connorco]

I haven't really been getting the results I've been hoping for with BIF on the R7. I think it's most likely because I'm using a broken EF 100-400 lens with the R7. I'm hoping to upgrade to the 100-500 soon, but it's a pretty expensive upgrade. I definitely won't be buying one for a few months at least. I'm getting the occasional decent photo, but they're few and far between. My camera is just having difficulty locking on subjects, and has some weird effects due to the broken parts inside.

 

[Steve Arlow]

Had issues today with the R7 using a 1.4x extender, not had issues before using an extender.
Great White Egret against a darker background, it was a fair distance. Viewfinder would find the eye or with eye detect off it would still lock onto the bird but the actual image coming back shows that despite the EVF showing bird/subject focus locked it is the background that is in focus and the egret is a mess of pixels and very much out of focus.
Light was poor but that really shouldn't have resulted in the dark background being sharper that the egret that the camera was telling was in focus.
The more I am using the R7 the more I am disliking it

 

[edenwatcher]

I can relate it to this. While I have taken more detailed photos than I ever could with the 7DII and when it all works it's great, there are so many times when I get really frustrated with it. I love(d) the 7DII and by and large it did what I wanted. The R7 not so much. Having said that today I got some really nice twite photos with it.

Rob

 

[Evan Atkinson]

Had issues today with the R7 using a 1.4x extender, not had issues before using an extender.
Great White Egret against a darker background, it was a fair distance. Viewfinder would find the eye or with eye detect off it would still lock onto the bird but the actual image coming back shows that despite the EVF showing bird/subject focus locked it is the background that is in focus and the egret is a mess of pixels and very much out of focus.
Light was poor but that really shouldn't have resulted in the dark background being sharper that the egret that the camera was telling was in focus.
The more I am using the R7 the more I am disliking it

My mate, who I borrowed the R7 from, has issues with the AF, especially in poor light. When used in sun, or direct lighting, the AF dramatically improved, at least for me it did. It could also be that the bird was much closer to the background than you may have anticipated, and the AF points hopped on to the background on accident.

Edit: What lens were you using the extender with?

 

[Evan Atkinson]

I can relate it to this. While I have taken more detailed photos than I ever could with the 7DII and when it all works it's great, there are so many times when I get really frustrated with it. I love(d) the 7DII and by and large it did what I wanted. The R7 not so much. Having said that today I got some really nice twite photos with it.

Rob

I am the complete opposite, even though I have only used the R7 once, the IQ on it is a lot better than the 7dmkii, at least through my eyes. I find that I can crop a lot more with the R7 than on the 7dmkii which is obviously due to the 33MP body compared to 20MP. I tested the R7 at Stodmarsh NNR in Kent, and the AF tracked a marsh harrier through a tree. I think the R7 is a camera that needs use in sun light, you may get away with slightly overcast days, but if its really grey I dont think there's much point taking it out. There were various instances where I was shooting at 2500 ISO, and that didn't really seem to put the AF off to much. i was using the Canon EF 100-400 II lens when I tested it and I had no issues with it. Sure it missed 5 or 6 shots, but that was out of 350+ BIF photos taken. It's a very promising camera but there are definitely drawbacks to it.

Kind regards
Ev

 

[Steve Arlow]

My mate, who I borrowed the R7 from, has issues with the AF, especially in poor light. When used in sun, or direct lighting, the AF dramatically improved, at least for me it did. It could also be that the bird was much closer to the background than you may have anticipated, and the AF points hopped on to the background on accident.

Edit: What lens were you using the extender with?

The same issue occured at various distances with the bird in different places on the lagoon, 95% of the shots the back ground was infocus and the egret not. Its not a case of thje AF hopped to the background if the EVF is showing its locked onto the bird.
I was using the canon 100-400mm EF lens with an EF extender as as mentioned previously not had any issues with using an extender with this combination.

I've not just used it once, the R7 is in constant use since I got it, both in the UK this winter and in the Gambia where the light was overall much better, and the settings have been fine tuned.

I was wondering if the 100-400mm mk2 is back focusing, the R7 doesn't have a microadjustment option for me to try this out. I know my 500mm I needed to adjust the microadjustment on my 7Dmkii and 1DX as it was slightly front focusing so how is one meant to correct for this is the option in not in the camera's seettings/menu.

I also had an issue yesterday when my 500mm F4 was attached and in flight Mute Swans were a dotted, pixelated mess, another all white species. !

 

[Barred Wobbler]

The eye detection struggled a bit this morning, although there were hits as well as misses. Hardly surprising given all the distractions in the way of scales and grass stems. I don't think the vertical slit of a pupil helped either.

Found the goose OK though.

 

[davids]

I'm generally very pleased with the AF performance of my R7 coupled with the RF100-400mm. One issue I'm struggling to understand though is the accuracy/position of the focus box. When I use eye AF and track a BIF the focus box can wander off the bird onto the background but the bird stays in focus. This effect can also be seen when reviewing the images either in camera or in DPP, the position of the focus box does not actually reflect the focus point. Has anybody else noticed this or has an explanation for what is occuring? I've attached a screenshot which shows thes issue; the swan is in focus but the focus box can be seen on the background.

Thanks in advance.

David

 

[Barred Wobbler]

I'm generally very pleased with the AF performance of my R7 coupled with the RF100-400mm. One issue I'm struggling to understand though is the accuracy/position of the focus box. When I use eye AF and track a BIF the focus box can wander off the bird onto the background but the bird stays in focus. This effect can also be seen when reviewing the images either in camera or in DPP, the position of the focus box does not actually reflect the focus point. Has anybody else noticed this or has an explanation for what is occuring? I've attached a screenshot which shows thes issue; the swan is in focus but the focus box can be seen on the background.

Thanks in advance.

David

That focus box replay thing is notorious for being wrong, not just on the new mirrorless cameras, but on the DSLRs too. On the rare occasions I used it on my old 7Dii, sometimes it coincided with the point in focus, sometimes it was off, just like on your example. I disabled it to slightly reduce any drain on the battery when looking at replays. It probably made no difference, but I couldn't see the point of it if it wasn't accurate.

 

[davids]

That focus box replay thing is notorious for being wrong, not just on the new mirrorless cameras, but on the DSLRs too. On the rare occasions I used it on my old 7Dii, sometimes it coincided with the point in focus, sometimes it was off, just like on your example. I disabled it to slightly reduce any drain on the battery when looking at replays. It probably made no difference, but I couldn't see the point of it if it wasn't accurate.

Thanks for your reply. Do you see this effect in the live image as well as when reviewing/replay images?

 

[Barred Wobbler]

Thanks for your reply. Do you see this effect in the live image as well as when reviewing/replay images?

Not that I'm aware of. It's a different system in use.

 

[SimonG4ELI]

Just getting back into birding after a break of ~10 years. I have a new R7, rf100-400mm and the rf800mm f11. As I was already using the 7D Mk I staying with Canon was an easy choice.

I find this an amazing setup for daytime photography while walking around the coast of Cornwall with my dog.

Value for money, the rf800mm really does it for me, the attachment is just a point & shoot with the rf800mm.

 

[Roy C]

Taken with the R7 and RF 800mm f11. BIF is not easy with the 800/11 because of the narrow FOV making it difficult to pick up the bird in the viewfinder/focus area but once you do the R7 latches on to the bird(s) no problem.

 

[Barred Wobbler]

First time out for a couple of weeks. Local chiffchaffs today. The last shot was ISO 5000 in deep shade in ivy.

 

[SimonG4ELI]

Unedited, Helford Passage this morning.

R7 + rf800mm f11. Having great fun!

View attachment 1Z3A1454.JPG

 

[Roy C]

Wheatear taken with the R7 and RF 800mm f11 lens (so 1280mm fov) handheld. I am still impressed with this lens/combo.

 

[Evan Atkinson]

I have a 6 month photography exam coming up and I will be basing it on swifts, swallows and martins... all incredibly fast flyers. I'm in a very fortunate situation as my photography teacher has agreed to contribute money towards rentals. I have already decided to use the 100-500, it's an exceptional lens, and the primes are just a bit too heavy and I feel like it's too far of a step because I think I will miss too many shots with a prime in comparison to the zoom. I am having a tough time deciding between the R7 or the R5 for these photoshoots. I am probably going to be printing them out onto large canvases. I have experience with the R7, but is 32MP enough compared to the R5's 45MP? I am unsure as to which is better in terms of AF, and of course I can shoot full electronic on the R5, but the R7 would likely have some rolling shutter distortion. Which do I go for??

Edit: I should also note that I know one of the sites very well (Reculver) and I know the birds' flight patterns fairly well.

Kind regards

Evan

 

[Gronk08]

I have a 6 month photography exam coming up and I will be basing it on swifts, swallows and martins... all incredibly fast flyers. I'm in a very fortunate situation as my photography teacher has agreed to contribute money towards rentals. I have already decided to use the 100-500, it's an exceptional lens, and the primes are just a bit too heavy and I feel like it's too far of a step because I think I will miss too many shots with a prime in comparison to the zoom. I am having a tough time deciding between the R7 or the R5 for these photoshoots. I am probably going to be printing them out onto large canvases. I have experience with the R7, but is 32MP enough compared to the R5's 45MP? I am unsure as to which is better in terms of AF, and of course I can shoot full electronic on the R5, but the R7 would likely have some rolling shutter distortion. Which do I go for??

Edit: I should also note that I know one of the sites very well (Reculver) and I know the birds' flight patterns fairly well.

Kind regards

Evan

I would not get to hung up about the difference in MP between the two cameras as I have very prints from the R3 and that has less MP than either two cameras.
If you any more familiar with the R7 it may be best to stick with it rather than having to get use to another camera. Although the R5 does have the advantage of being able to take a battery grip giving you longer in the field getting your shots.
Best of luck with the exam.
Tim.

 

[Evan Atkinson]

I would not get to hung up about the difference in MP between the two cameras as I have very prints from the R3 and that has less MP than either two cameras.
If you any more familiar with the R7 it may be best to stick with it rather than having to get use to another camera. Although the R5 does have the advantage of being able to take a battery grip giving you longer in the field getting your shots.
Best of luck with the exam.
Tim.

Ok, well I think it is probably better for me to continue with the R7 because that is what I am genuinely planning to upgrade too. The R3 would be great to use but from a brief search I would be paying £150 for a day with it which is way out of my budget. I will likely continue to use the R7 and RF 100-500 for the exams coming up. Although I would love to try a prime lens, I think they are not quite right for me and I need a bit more experience in the field. Since the R7 uses Canon 7dmkii batteries, I don't really need to worry about a battery grip as I have enough for at least 12 hours. Thank you for the kind words, very much appreciated.

Evan

 

[Roy C]

Still enjoying the R7, here a couple from last week taken with the R7 and RF100-500 + 1.4x extender (so 1120mm FOV)