Canon R5 vs. R7.

KK Hui wrote: If you can get near to your subjects Full Frame is the way to go. I don't have the R5 so no comment on that.
I pick the R7 for its APS-C and relatively high pixel.
I shoot mostly BIF and land birds and have been happy with it.
At that price point you have not many choices except perhaps the new the SONY a6700.

WJaekel wrote:Interesting, so you haven't experienced any problems with AF inconsistency or rolling shutter when panning and/or shooting BIF ?

KK Hui wrote: I use ES almost all the time and never MS for BIF. Sure, there is strong rolling shutter effect due to slow sensor read-out of R7 but you get away with most if you pan BIF shots without tall buildings/ trees (but how often?) in the background. I don't notice any major AF inconsistency only perhaps occasionally but maybe due to operator error ...

See some of my recent work here at Flickr if you're interested :-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/169408738@N08/
 

WJaekel wrote:

KK Hui wrote: I use ES almost all the time and never MS for BIF. Sure, there is strong rolling shutter effect due to slow sensor read-out of R7 but you get away with most if you pan BIF shots without tall buildings/ trees (but how often?) in the background. I don't notice any major AF inconsistency only perhaps occasionally but maybe due to operator error ...

See some of my recent work here at Flickr if you're interested :-
https://www.flickr.com/photos/169408738@N08/
 

Very nice photographs, thank you !  Indeed, as for panning, the impact of the rolling shutter effect depends on the background.. If you shot against the blue sky as shown on your tern shots, there's no issue, of course. If you're photographing BIF with trees in the background, it may be evident, though. I didn't see any strange deformations of the bird wings in your pictures either. I guess the impact of rolling shutter depends on the speed of the wing beat, though, and maybe on the angle of the capture, too. Terns, herons, storcks, raptors etc, - even ducks flying off or landing - usually don't have that fast wing movements. So maybe the read-out of the sensor still can keep up. Just speculation, though. However if you photograph fast flying songbirds or even hummingbirds it's probably another story. 

In the end, it's a personal consideration and decision, of course, whether the advantages of the R7 outweigh the limitations discussed in the reviews. Perhaps I can get a loaner camera from CPS sometime later and test it by myself to find that out. Regarding the OP I stand with my recommendation to keep the R5, though.

Wolfgang
www.wjaekel-foto.de

I bought my R7 based off of seeing KK's shots.  After reading several posts, and watching numerous videos I came up with settings that work for me.  I was surprised to hear people talking about inconsistent auto-focus.  I have had zero issues regardless of the background - both hand holding a 600mm f/4, and having it on a tripod.  Same goes for hand holding a 300mm f/2.8.  Once I lock onto the bird more often than not it stays in focus.  I'm not sure if I am as someone said "a respected reviewer", but I have shot Canon since the early 80's.  My experience with the R7 has been very good.  I think a lot of the issues mentioned with auto-focus can be resolved with camera settings.  I have been looking at the R5 as well, but can't justify buying it since I already own a Canon 5Dsr.

With that said I can say that I found the Canon 10D to have, for the time, excellent auto-focus as well.

Curious to hear more about the inconsistent Auto-focus issues.

Regards,

Terry