EOS R7 - will there be an update that corrects autofocus issues?

[K.Wray]

I had a chance to shoot some more shorebirds today. Only real change I did prior to this shoot was reset and reapply all the camera settings on the R7. Today it had about a 85 % critically sharp keeper rate, big improvement. It still had a few unexplainable blurry shots, where I checked in DPP and it claimed focus was on the eye. Today was acceptable, hope it stays that way. The last image is an example of one of the bad/blurry shots that should have been good but had some issue.

 

[AlanF]

I had a chance to shoot some more shorebirds today. Only real change I did prior to this shoot was reset and reapply all the camera settings on the R7. Today it had about a 85 % critically sharp keeper rate, big improvement. It still had a few unexplainable blurry shots, where I checked in DPP and it claimed focus was on the eye. Today was acceptable, hope it stays that way. The last image is an example of one of the bad/blurry shots that should have been good but had some issue.

Pleased it's now working.

 

[K.Wray]

It seems like quite a few people are having the same issues that I had with the R7, more videos displaying the proble. This Duade Paton video shows it better than I could, lots of R7 owners in the video comments having the issue.

 

[mawz]

I've seen this a bit myself. My impression is that the AF system is outrunning the sensor and causing some Panasonic-style focus pulsing as it over-corrects and catches up. It really feels like too much gain in the PID loop of the control system for the focus position.

It should be solvable in firmware IMHO, I suspect the answer is to slow down the focus system so it quits outrunning its data feed.

 

[K.Wray]

I was shooting shorebirds again yesterday and the R7 again had an horrible keeper rate. I was shooting a single American Avocet close up in good morning light with it missing hudreds of shots. I took 500 to 600 shots of the Avocet as they are not super common in my area and only got 15 to 20 ultra sharp keepers. Avocets are not exactly speed demons, this should have been easy for eye detect to keep up. My R6 nails them almost constantly. I could get high 90 % keeper rate with the 7D Mark II. Still not sure what is going on, it seems to not be able to keep up with the birds movement. I switched back and forth between electric first curtain and and full electric shutter with no difference observed. I was taking alot of shots one at a time and that didnt seem to help either. Next step is to try with exposure simulation turned off as some people reported better focusing with that turned off. Here is an example of one of the few good pics and a few of the many bad ones.

 

[Czardoom]

I was shooting shorebirds again yesterday and the R7 again had an horrible keeper rate. I was shooting a single American Avocet close up in good morning light with it missing hudreds of shots. I took 500 to 600 shots of the Avocet as they are not super common in my area and only got 15 to 20 ultra sharp keepers. Avocets are not exactly speed demons, this should have been easy for eye detect to keep up. My R6 nails them almost constantly. I could get high 90 % keeper rate with the 7D Mark II. Still not sure what is going on, it seems to not be able to keep up with the birds movement. I switched back and forth between electric first curtain and and full electric shutter with no difference observed. I was taking alot of shots one at a time and that didnt seem to help either. Next step is to try with exposure simulation turned off as some people reported better focusing with that turned off. Here is an example of one of the few good pics and a few of the many bad ones.

I will not assume I know what is going on with you and your camera, but I will offer some possibilities based on my experience over the past year. A couple posts ago you noted a really high percent of sharp photos and in this last post you note a very low number of really sharp. I would offer the possibility that on the day you got really sharp images, the air was clear, humidity low. On this past day, atmosphere not so clear and also the possibility that air and water temperature differered enough to cause some distortion. In the late winter and early spring I took 4 excursions to photograph eagles at a local lake. On 3 occasions, most shots slightly soft. On the 4th occasion, almost all shots tack sharp. I attribute this to variations in the atmosphere due to humidity and perhaps more importantly when shooting over water, the temperature differences between air and water causing distortion. This has seemed the norm when shooting with a zoom at high magnification on a pixel dense camera, both my R7 and Olympus OM-1. With both cameras I am at 800mm equivalent magnification. I think many folks tend to forget that when shooting at that high a magnification, many things can soften your images, including also not using a high enough shutter speed. Looking at your Avocet pics, I would call them sharp. Not tack sharp, but, at least for me, quite acceptably sharp.
Again, with a pixel dense camera, I expect to put almost every shot through Topaz sharpen, and when I do, they look great.
I understand that my experience may differ than yours and other folks - and my expectaions and what is considered "sharp" will vary between each of us. So, please take my comments with a grain of salt. They may or may not apply to your, and other's, situations.

 

[K.Wray]

I will not assume I know what is going on with you and your camera, but I will offer some possibilities based on my experience over the past year. A couple posts ago you noted a really high percent of sharp photos and in this last post you note a very low number of really sharp. I would offer the possibility that on the day you got really sharp images, the air was clear, humidity low. On this past day, atmosphere not so clear and also the possibility that air and water temperature differered enough to cause some distortion. In the late winter and early spring I took 4 excursions to photograph eagles at a local lake. On 3 occasions, most shots slightly soft. On the 4th occasion, almost all shots tack sharp. I attribute this to variations in the atmosphere due to humidity and perhaps more importantly when shooting over water, the temperature differences between air and water causing distortion. This has seemed the norm when shooting with a zoom at high magnification on a pixel dense camera, both my R7 and Olympus OM-1. With both cameras I am at 800mm equivalent magnification. I think many folks tend to forget that when shooting at that high a magnification, many things can soften your images, including also not using a high enough shutter speed. Looking at your Avocet pics, I would call them sharp. Not tack sharp, but, at least for me, quite acceptably sharp.
Again, with a pixel dense camera, I expect to put almost every shot through Topaz sharpen, and when I do, they look great.
I understand that my experience may differ than yours and other folks - and my expectaions and what is considered "sharp" will vary between each of us. So, please take my comments with a grain of salt. They may or may not apply to your, and other's, situations.

I believe my last successful outing was due to the bird's, a Dunlin, behavior. It was much more stationary and fed frequently in the same position. This Avocet was feeding while walking, rarely still. It wasn't moving fast,but moving continuously. R6 would have nailed almost everyone of those shots. I would have using my old 7D II. I did not see any atmospheric haze from the water that morning. I appreciate yours and every suggestion, shorebird season is starting around here now, getting desperate to figure this out.

 

[K.Wray]

I will not assume I know what is going on with you and your camera, but I will offer some possibilities based on my experience over the past year. A couple posts ago you noted a really high percent of sharp photos and in this last post you note a very low number of really sharp. I would offer the possibility that on the day you got really sharp images, the air was clear, humidity low. On this past day, atmosphere not so clear and also the possibility that air and water temperature differered enough to cause some distortion. In the late winter and early spring I took 4 excursions to photograph eagles at a local lake. On 3 occasions, most shots slightly soft. On the 4th occasion, almost all shots tack sharp. I attribute this to variations in the atmosphere due to humidity and perhaps more importantly when shooting over water, the temperature differences between air and water causing distortion. This has seemed the norm when shooting with a zoom at high magnification on a pixel dense camera, both my R7 and Olympus OM-1. With both cameras I am at 800mm equivalent magnification. I think many folks tend to forget that when shooting at that high a magnification, many things can soften your images, including also not using a high enough shutter speed. Looking at your Avocet pics, I would call them sharp. Not tack sharp, but, at least for me, quite acceptably sharp.
Again, with a pixel dense camera, I expect to put almost every shot through Topaz sharpen, and when I do, they look great.
I understand that my experience may differ than yours and other folks - and my expectaions and what is considered "sharp" will vary between each of us. So, please take my comments with a grain of salt. They may or may not apply to your, and other's, situations.

Another odd situation, I and others are observing is that it seems to focus better during video, much better luck in video mode focusing on the eye.

 

[K.Wray]

Today I relocated the same American Avocet and shot around 500 more pictures. This time I tried slow speed continuous fps and exposure simulation turned off. Tried both Electronic First Curtain and ES this time around was still the same horrible results. There were times where there were 100 shots in a row out of focus. Even when the bird was standing still the head/eye would be out of focus. These are shots I dont think any other camera would miss. In a last ditch effort I am going to send the R7 into Canon, I doubt they will find anything but it's my last hope. I may try a Fuji XH2S and adapt my Canon EF lenses to that, or stick with using the R6, or revert back to the 7DII. I really would like a functional crop camera with eye detect, cant wait for a R7 mark II if they ever make one.

 

[AlanF]

Today I relocated the same American Avocet and shot around 500 more pictures. This time I tried slow speed continuous fps and exposure simulation turned off. Tried both Electronic First Curtain and ES this time around was still the same horrible results. There were times where there were 100 shots in a row out of focus. Even when the bird was standing still the head/eye would be out of focus. These are shots I dont think any other camera would miss. In a last ditch effort I am going to send the R7 into Canon, I doubt they will find anything but it's my last hope. I may try a Fuji XH2S and adapt my Canon EF lenses to that, or stick with using the R6, or revert back to the 7DII. I really would like a functional crop camera with eye detect, cant wait for a R7 mark II if they ever make one.

I have gone out in the last couple of days and tested my R7 photographing several series of a 100 shots on birds that hung around for long enough. The keeper rate was 70% plus. This site measures AF for birds in flight https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/ He doesn't like the R7 but he does get 70-80% tack sharp with it. There is clearly something wrong with your R7 so you have done the right thing sending it back.

 

[K.Wray]

Follow-up, I ended up sending my R7 into Canon, at first they said they found nothing wrong, I sent in more bad pics, they said they calibrated focus. The camera was returned, tested it twice, horrible results, same issues as before, missed some incredible shots of a Buff-breasted Sandpiper. Focus was so bad that it missed focus 148 shots in a row. Sent camera back in a second time, Canon still finds nothing wrong with it. I did finally solve my R7 issues, I bought a Fuji X-H2S and adapt my Canon glass to it. First time out with that camera and my Ef 500 f4 II, I had 90 % keeper rate. My R6 focuses better than the X-H2S but it is plenty good enough for me, and I need one good crop camera for skittish shorebirds. My R7 comes back tomorrow but I have to assume it's a lost cause. I can't sell it knowing it is so bad.

 

[esimioni]

@K.Wray, please let me know if Canon was able to fix your R7. I'm having the exact same issues and it is beyond frustrating.
Last weekend I spent a good amount of money on a trip, took about 2700 shots of birds in many different environments and situations, most of them not moving much (when the shots were taken). I'm happy with the sharpness in less than 20. Most are too bad to be used.

I have switched from an R5 to the R7 for the extra reach and better eye/body tracking, but I'm almost regretting it now.
I was never able to get any image as sharp as I see some photographers posting with the R7 + RF 100-500mm combo.
I know, DxO, Topaz, Post-Processing, etc., etc... I'm also using them, at least when a shot is worth going trough post processing.

 

[AlanF]

@K.Wray, please let me know if Canon was able to fix your R7. I'm having the exact same issues and it is beyond frustrating.
Last weekend I spent a good amount of money on a trip, took about 2700 shots of birds in many different environments and situations, most of them not moving much (when the shots were taken). I'm happy with the sharpness in less than 20. Most are too bad to be used.

I have switched from an R5 to the R7 for the extra reach and better eye/body tracking, but I'm almost regretting it now.
I was never able to get any image as sharp as I see some photographers posting with the R7 + RF 100-500mm combo.
I know, DxO, Topaz, Post-Processing, etc., etc... I'm also using them, at least when a shot is worth going trough post processing.

You have a bum copy. Send it back to Canon.

 

[K.Wray]

You have a bum copy. Send it back to Canon.

I have sent camera twice to Canon, they insist that nothing is wrong with it. They

You have a bum copy. Send it back to Canon.

I have sent my R7 back to Canon twice. 1st they said they couldn't find anything, I sent more bad photo examples, they then said they calibrated focus, sent it back to me. I tested it on 2 outings with same bad results, like 10 good shots out of 500 to 600 shots. All using servo and eye detect on birds. Canon keeps trying to say I shouldn't use servo for slow moving birds and should use electric shutter. I tried using just electric shutter with same results. If servo or eye detect is the problem, there is no point using it. The R7 performs this way with 500 f4 II and 100-400 II. My R6 performs perfectly high 90s Ultra sharp keeper rate. My Fuji Xh2s with both lenses adapted performs low to mid 90s keeper rate.

 

[K.Wray]

You have a bum copy. Send it back to Canon.

I have sent camera twice to Canon, they insist that nothing is wrong with it. They

You have a bum copy. Send it back to Canon.

I have sent my R7 back to Canon twice. 1st they said they couldn't find anything, I sent more bad photo examples, they then said they calibrated focus, sent it back to me. I tested it on 2 outings with same bad results, like 10 good shots out of 500 to 600 shots. All using servo and eye detect on birds. Canon keeps trying to say I shouldn't use servo for slow moving birds and should use electric shutter. I tried using just electric shutter with same results. If servo or eye detect is the problem, there is no point using it. The R7 performs this way with 500 f4 II and 100-400 II. My R6 performs perfectly high 90s UltraSPARC keeper rate. My Fuji Xh2s with both lenses adapted performs low to mid 90s keeper rate

@K.Wray, please let me know if Canon was able to fix your R7. I'm having the exact same issues and it is beyond frustrating.
Last weekend I spent a good amount of money on a trip, took about 2700 shots of birds in many different environments and situations, most of them not moving much (when the shots were taken). I'm happy with the sharpness in less than 20. Most are too bad to be used.

I have switched from an R5 to the R7 for the extra reach and better eye/body tracking, but I'm almost regretting it now.
I was never able to get any image as sharp as I see some photographers posting with the R7 + RF 100-500mm combo.
I know, DxO, Topaz, Post-Processing, etc., etc... I'm also using them, at least when a shot is worth going trough post processing.

That's about the same luck I was having. They will not fix mine as they insist nothing is wrong with it. I suspect something is wrong with R7 servo focussing as they keep trying to stop me from using that and want me to use electric shutter. Maybe servo is throwing off focus. Not sure if or when I will mess with R7 again, pretty much stuck with it now. I cant sell it knowing how bad it is. Just hope the R7 II is better, if and when they make one. Let me k ow if you try shooting out of servo, curious to see if there is any improvement.

 

[AlanF]

I have sent camera twice to Canon, they insist that nothing is wrong with it. They

I have sent my R7 back to Canon twice. 1st they said they couldn't find anything, I sent more bad photo examples, they then said they calibrated focus, sent it back to me. I tested it on 2 outings with same bad results, like 10 good shots out of 500 to 600 shots. All using servo and eye detect on birds. Canon keeps trying to say I shouldn't use servo for slow moving birds and should use electric shutter. I tried using just electric shutter with same results. If servo or eye detect is the problem, there is no point using it. The R7 performs this way with 500 f4 II and 100-400 II. My R6 performs perfectly high 90s UltraSPARC keeper rate. My Fuji Xh2s with both lenses adapted performs low to mid 90s keeper rate

That's about the same luck I was having. They will not fix mine as they insist nothing is wrong with it. I suspect something is wrong with R7 servo focussing as they keep trying to stop me from using that and want me to use electric shutter. Maybe servo is throwing off focus. Not sure if or when I will mess with R7 again, pretty much stuck with it now. I cant sell it knowing how bad it is. Just hope the R7 II is better, if and when they make one. Let me k ow if you try shooting out of servo, curious to see if there is any improvement.

I use different settings on my R7 from my R5 partly because of problems with shutter shock (below about 1/250s) and also rolling shutter. Up to about 1/500s I use only ES. So, my standard basic settings for perched and slowly moving birds, insects and people are: electronic shutter with back button focus with AF-on, subject detection animals, eyeAF on subject tracking full area servo, case 1; or BBF with * button, as for the AF-on with servo and centre point focus (fixed at centre), tracking off, subject off. For BIF, flying insects etc or where motion would be affected by rolling shutter, I use EFCS. I use servo all the time. If yours doesn't focus under those simple settings, then the camera is faulty.

 

[K.Wray]

I realize my R7 isn't working right, but I can't seem to convince Canon of that. I shipped to them to fix it twice, sent 100s of examples of bad photos, asked if it could be replaced, they say they repair not replace, but they won't repair. I asked of there testing methods on weather they test in servo and eye detect as that was where I am having issues, but the person you speak with is not the tech working on repair. I also asked to have the original firmware put back on, not sure if they did that as they said they didn't do anything but check the camera.

I use different settings on my R7 from my R5 partly because of problems with shutter shock (below about 1/250s) and also rolling shutter. Up to about 1/500s I use only ES. So, my standard basic settings for perched and slowly moving birds, insects and people are: electronic shutter with back button focus with AF-on, subject detection animals, eyeAF on subject tracking full area servo, case 1; or BBF with * button, as for the AF-on with servo and centre point focus (fixed at centre), tracking off, subject off. For BIF, flying insects etc or where motion would be affected by rolling shutter, I use EFCS. I use servo all the time. If yours doesn't focus under those simple settings, then the camera is faulty.

 

[AlanF]

I realize my R7 isn't working right, but I can't seem to convince Canon of that. I shipped to them to fix it twice, sent 100s of examples of bad photos, asked if it could be replaced, they say they repair not replace, but they won't repair. I asked of there testing methods on weather they test in servo and eye detect as that was where I am having issues, but the person you speak with is not the tech working on repair. I also asked to have the original firmware put back on, not sure if they did that as they said they didn't do anything but check the camera.

You are a decent person who won't sell on Canon's problem and who is being treated disgustingly by Canon.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I realize my R7 isn't working right, but I can't seem to convince Canon of that. I shipped to them to fix it twice, sent 100s of examples of bad photos, asked if it could be replaced, they say they repair not replace, but they won't repair. I asked of there testing methods on weather they test in servo and eye detect as that was where I am having issues, but the person you speak with is not the tech working on repair. I also asked to have the original firmware put back on, not sure if they did that as they said they didn't do anything but check the camera.

Not sure where you are, but are there 'lemon laws' than can help? In some states in the US, there are laws that if you send a product in more than three times during the warranty period and it is not fixed, the manufacturer must replace it with a new one. Usually written for cars, but many times such laws apply to other products as well.

 

[esimioni]

My Fuji Xh2s with both lenses adapted performs low to mid 90s keeper rate

@K.Wray I'm very interested in learning more about the X-H2S, if you could share a bit more of your experience, pros an cons compared to the R7, that would be great.
I wasn't considering at all switching to a different camera brand, I just wanted my R7 to work, but after all the problems I'm starting to consider that option. If I do change, I'd probably use my RF 100-500mm with it. Your experience and thoughts with adapted lenses would be of great value to me.