We added a new camera to the family.
We purchased a new Canon EOS R7 for my wife Legger. Here are some of the first test images.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Inquiring minds want to know the lenses. In a non-disparaging way, "a camera is just a camera" (I know, they're small supercomputers these days)
Resolution is great. Now that I upped my internet connection, the slightly large size is fine. Appreciated, in fact.
How good? Well, I can answer that earlier question:
I loved my Yashica Mat, or as the spell-checker wanted me to say: Yeshiva Mat!!!. Took amazing fall foliage photos in New Hampshire back in the day.
Do tell more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tessar
The amazing Paul Rudolph calculated the design by hand.
Found 'em on the Yashicas, Mamiya TLR's, Rolleiflexes and Koni-Omegas, and the Elmars on Leica cameras.
If that doesn't bring a tear to your eye, you're not an optical engineer!
You still haven't said what lens. If around $600, probably a kit lens --- got to get a bit long unless you are in a bird blind. Very nice resolution and contrast even if you did send pix to the Google supercomputer for A.I. processing.
I loved my YashicaMats back in the 70s, but honestly, they were all I could afford. I really would have killed for a Mamiya C220 or C330, or a Koni-Omega, but they were out of my budget. All the wedding photographers I knew used the Mamiyas, and one of my friends still has his.
The lens wasn't a kit lens. Actually, these pics were shot with four different lenses. Last month I purchased a new RF 100-400mm for the new R7, three weeks before I even had the camera. The lens works out to about a 160-640mm with the crop sensor. It's a lightweight, inexpensive lens in the Canon IS STM line. My wife has shoulder and back injuries, and the heavier lenses just weren't good for her. It was only about $600, which isn't much for quality Canon glass. The two interior shots were with the RF 18-150mm kit lens. The closeups of the house finch were shot with the RF 100-400.
The other two lenses were a Sigma 150-600mm and a Canon L series RF100-500mm which usually lives on my R5. Yes, I own too much gear. 
I didn't use Google for the processing. I used Adobe Camera Raw, and added some Topaz wizardry to some of them.
Quite the collection. But I am sure you make good use of them.
For 7+ years, I used only a Coolpix P510. The effective 24-1000 mm. range did everything, and still chugs along. Got my hummingbird photos with it this year.
I bypassed DSLR's entirely, and jumped to mirrorless when the bug to finally get a 20mm lens got to me. This worked out best for me.
Unlike you others, I did get that Hasselblad from a service buddy who worked in a camera shop. I was very young and very foolish and spent about a year's worth of service pay on the outfit. Fifty+ years later, I had a Governor go out and had it repaired, so I am back in business, along with the mirrorless.
Since I have the coolpix, despite the small sensor, it has the "reach" so I don't have to fret about long, expensive lenses. I am more of a wide angle person and sometimes flower person. Birds and wildfires and planes just show up. Not my "focus"
There is a world of difference between 20 and 24 equivalents. I get two mountain peaks in the same sunrise and cloud photos, and they frame them perfectly.
©usonian.
