Canon R7 vs Canon 90D

[jrw.aviation]

Hello all

I've recently gotten the bug again for aviation photography and been absolutely loving going to RAF Lakenheath for a day out. Unfortunately my camera equipment is quickly becoming ancient, My main a couple years back was a canon 7D and backup a 5Dii but now the screen on my 7D no longer works and has rendered it pretty much useless. So now I'm just on the 5Dii which just isn't doing the job for me. I've been looking around and found that I can get a 90D for about 700-800 quid for a good second-hand camera and the R7 about 1000-1100 however I would also need the converter for the R7 so add another 100 quid too it.

I would like to know what peoples opinions are on the both the 90D is cheaper and a DSLR which I'm used too but is already 5 years old and the R7 I've heard is a pain to get used too, more expensive however it being newer technology and newer in general very much interests me. I only have one lens the 70-300 L IS F4-F5.6 for now but if the bug for aviation photography continues then soon down the line I defiantly might look at investing into the 100-500 (Assuming I get the mirrorless). Last night I was reading a lot on this forum and found people having very much different opinions on the 90D some people love it and some people would chuck it in a fire, although the guys chucking it in a fire didn't describe too much on why they hate it so much.

My budget is Max 1500 quid for a good second-hand piece of equipment so I'm open to any suggestions not just these two, any help would be very much appreciated it's a lot of money to spend so wanna make the perfect choice for me.
Thanks again.

[Pauld339]

Never used the 90D, but I do own an R7. Fundamentally the R7 is a simple camera that I was taking great shots with about an hour after unboxing it. It's as complicated as you want to make it, particularly if you read everything about shutter modes. But if you just copy some sensible settings it's not a pain to get used to at all.

[jrw.aviation]

Never used the 90D, but I do own an R7. Fundamentally the R7 is a simple camera that I was taking great shots with about an hour after unboxing it. It's as complicated as you want to make it, particularly if you read everything about shutter modes. But if you just copy some sensible settings it's not a pain to get used to at all.

Thanks for the feedback, I've been looking through photographers images who have used the R7 with very similar glass to me and am amazed with the images. For sure leaning towards going with the R7 for now, I've heard a couple people saying about the camera not being able to keep up with the 15 fps and it simply failing on fast bursts. Do you have any experience with this? thanks again

[Pauld339]

H+ mode (15 fps) does feel clunky - the refresh rate seems to start lagging behind reality. I use therefore use H mode instead, which is perhaps 8 fps(?) which is more than adequate for me. But yes if you want 15 fps the R7 struggles.

[JPS]

R7 has a better AF so that would be my choice, I have a 90D and the sharp images hit rate is not impressive. Please note that both have the same sensor which is prone to high noise levels even at low ISO. The R7 mark II, which should have a new and better stacked sensor, is expected in 2025.

[jrw.aviation]

H+ mode (15 fps) does feel clunky - the refresh rate seems to start lagging behind reality. I use therefore use H mode instead, which is perhaps 8 fps(?) which is more than adequate for me. But yes if you want 15 fps the R7 struggles.

Considering I'm used to the 7D (7.5fps) around the 8 mark should be good for me too. Thanks for this info it helps a lot.

[jrw.aviation]

R7 has a better AF so that would be my choice, I have a 90D and the sharp images hit rate is not impressive. Please note that both have the same sensor which is prone to high noise levels even at low ISO. The R7 mark II, which should have a new and better stacked sensor, is expected in 2025.

When you mention low ISO's how low do you mean? to be quite honest unless something very special is coming in, I won't wonder out to an airport unless the conditions are pretty perfect anyway. I would love to wait for the R7 mark II but I assume the price point would be way out of my budget (1500).

[JPS]

When you mention low ISO's how low do you mean? to be quite honest unless something very special is coming in, I won't wonder out to an airport unless the conditions are pretty perfect anyway. I would love to wait for the R7 mark II but I assume the price point would be way out of my budget (1500).

What I understand is that the pixel density of the sensor is the reason for the higher noise levels. But at a sunny day this will obviously be limited, especially with the R7 which shows better results on noise levels compared to the 90D as they tweaked the same sensor for better performance.

[jrw.aviation]

When you mention low ISO's how low do you mean? to be quite honest unless something very special is coming in, I won't wonder out to an airport unless the conditions are pretty perfect anyway. I would love to wait for the R7 mark II but I assume the price point would be way out of my budget (1500).

What I understand is that the pixel density of the sensor is the reason for the higher noise levels. But at a sunny day this will obviously be limited, especially with the R7 which shows better results on noise levels compared to the 90D.

thanks for the info, I think for my needs this wouldn't be too much of an issue. I'm by no means a professional and the R7 is still worlds ahead of what I'm used too. thanks again

[Pauld339]

For what it's worth, I've been impressed by the ISO performance

[Andy_99]

I have the R7 having moved from a 7D2. Yes it has limitations but..... you need to be aware of them & set the camera accordingly.
On many of the Social Media posts the main complainers are those that unbox the camera & expect it to turn them into the next photographer of the year.

I extremely pleased with mine, I took the time to do my research, watch respected YouTube content on set-up & then set the camera accordingly.

Low Light Performance - It's streets ahead of my 7D2, I was taking usable pictures in the almost dark at Lakenheath in Feb, yes initially noise is there but... careful use of denoise SW gets rid of most of it. If I'm taking photo's in the almost dark I switch to an appropriate lens (70-200 f2.8) as I know my 100-400 can't cope.

Rolling Shutter - Yes it's there on Electronic Shutter, switch to Mechanical or Electronic 1st Curtain, not hard to do. Rolling Shutter is there on the vast majority of Mirrorless cameras unless you spend big bucks.

Buffering - Yes the Buffer is fairly small to solve it shoot in H mode & invest in fast SD cards.

AF performance - Read-Up on how to use the camera & watch content on the best settings, set the camera accordingly & then experiment from there.

[GVLCN]

Can only talk for the 90d, i’ve owned a lot of canon’s in the past & have to say it was one of the worst! Best thing I done was sell it on, wish I done it sooner. I am now a lot happier after choosing a Nikon Dslr, mirrorless I deemed too expensive for hobby.

[jrw.aviation]

Can only talk for the 90d, i’ve owned a lot of canon’s in the past & have to say it was one of the worst! Best thing I done was sell it on, wish I done it sooner. I am now a lot happier after choosing a Nikon Dslr, mirrorless I deemed too expensive for hobby.

Appreciate the feedback on the 90D, I did read a lot on it from this forum and the majority of people didn't seem to be too happy with it. Any reason why? this is just pure curiosity because since I last came on this forum I have gone and bought the Canon R7. Not been able to test it out yet but very happy with the feels of it. I purchased along with it the 100-400 RF Lens and can't believe how incredibly light the whole setup is. makes my old setup (Canon 5D2 and 70-300 L IS) feel like a bag of bricks compared too it.

[GVLCN]

The 90d never really produced photos I was 100% happy with, on the ground it was fine however flying shots you could almost guarantee part of the aircraft to be out of focus. Plus the images were very noisy, I would never go above iso 400 and even in the sun the images were grainy.

[James Cutting]

Can only talk for the 90d, i’ve owned a lot of canon’s in the past & have to say it was one of the worst! Best thing I done was sell it on, wish I done it sooner. I am now a lot happier after choosing a Nikon Dslr, mirrorless I deemed too expensive for hobby.

Appreciate the feedback on the 90D, I did read a lot on it from this forum and the majority of people didn't seem to be too happy with it. Any reason why? this is just pure curiosity because since I last came on this forum I have gone and bought the Canon R7. Not been able to test it out yet but very happy with the feels of it. I purchased along with it the 100-400 RF Lens and can't believe how incredibly light the whole setup is. makes my old setup (Canon 5D2 and 70-300 L IS) feel like a bag of bricks compared too it.

I personally think it's all subjective at the end of the day, and I've run my 90D for the past 6 years and it's giving me some of my best shots ever - it also depends on what settings you're using and glass attached. I've shot ISO 400 and above before and been extremely impressed. Glad you've purchased something you're happy with! The R7 looks impressive but nothing I can afford just yet.

It's a happy camera in the sunshine:

Hellenic Air Force | F-4E Phantom II 01522 | Banking towards the crowd by James Cutting, on Flickr


And also in the dark with ISO 1000

Royal Danish Air Force C-130 flypast by James Cutting, on Flickr

But it is always a mixed bag with cameras, and you do tend to hear more negative about something than positive, I find in all things out there people (and this isn't a dig!) are more likely to leave negative feedback than positive. Look forward to your shots.

[James Cutting]

The 90d never really produced photos I was 100% happy with, on the ground it was fine however flying shots you could almost guarantee part of the aircraft to be out of focus. Plus the images were very noisy, I would never go above iso 400 and even in the sun the images were grainy.

Out of pure curiousity, what lens were you running with the 90D?

[GVLCN]

I did have the 100-400mm mk ii L series along with a 28-300mm L series, common factor was for me the camera & I’d place it not as good as previous canon dslr’s having owned.
Glad I made the swap to Nikon!

[James Cutting]

Fair play! I've bumped in to a few toggers very happy with a 90D so I guess it's horses for courses

[KisgergelyA]

I can only recommend the R7, actually I have two copies, one with a small lens, one with a long lens. The only cons are the small body - it's a bit small for my palm and no grip is available, the other con is the dodgy neck strap, uncomfortable for a camera with a heavy lens on it.

[Supra]

Mainly I like to be accurate & for others to be also. Don't own an R7 due to it Not having the functions I require. Do know a lot about it because I researched it & found it unsuitable for my use.
A grip is available (fact) that does improve the handhold. Does it fully function? No because the R7 doesn't have the necessary connectivity. (fact)
'Post some photo's'? I've nothing to show that hasn't been seen & posted by other talented people.