Farnboro John
Well-known member
I found this yesterday (but forgot in dealing with other stuff). You do need to be quite accurate because the view is narrower than you will be used to with the same lens, but the AF is so good and quick to pick up that with close-ish subjects you actually feel you have more time and can concentrate more easily on centreing the subject. More distant and against the sky seems a bit more difficult partly because of picking up something that may not be clearly viewable as it's well out of focus. I think that may be easier with the viewfinder brightened but haven't changed it yet.One word of caution for those who are moving on to the R7 from full frame, such as R5. (I'm still patiently waiting for my order).
18 months ago, when I went out for the first time with my new R5 to a local beach, I thought I'd give the in-body 1.6 crop function a try to see how the 17.5 MP compared to the 7D image. I was photographing rock pipits as they fed amongst the weed, sanderlings and turnstones dashing about and the odd redshank flying by. I quickly reverted back to full frame, because it made life so much easier in acquiring the moving target, not just because it gave the eye detection longer to lock on, but because it was so much easier to track the quicky-moving erratic targets in the wider view. When I was only using my 7Dii this never occurred to me because I was just getting on with what I knew.
The R7 APS-C sensor obviously gives more reach and with more pixels on the target than an R5, but at the cost of a much narrower view that makes tracking just that bit harder.
Teaching my granny to suck eggs, maybe, but just a thought that came to mind.
This is 65% of one of those R5 1.6 in body crop photos, 4114 pixels across the top, reduced from 5087, taken in the low sun three days before Christmas, one of the ones I caught of a rock pipit on the trot before I went back to full frame for an easier life.
1/800 sec, F8, ISO 3200. Eos R5 + Sigma 150-600 Sport at 600mm.
John