Since the release of both camera's I've been looking to get rid of my backup body (the RP) and add a crop sensor to the collection. Specifically for wildlife, to get more use out of my Tamron 150-600 telephoto lens. I recently picked up wildlife photography and enjoying it a lot, however not sure if it's something I'm fully committed on yet.

My main reason to go for either of these 2 bodies is their insane AI autofocus and tracking combined with the newest technology, DIGIC X and sensor. But here is where I'm stuck.

The R10 is basically the R7 but in a cheaper body with a bit less options but for me I wonder if the R7 is worth the extra price bump. This is why:

• I never had IBIS and I don't think I really need it

• I never use any camera in pouring rain or wet conditions

• I never do video on my camera

• I don't need 2 SD card slots (in 8 years I've had no issues using one slot)

• battery life of both camera's is already better than what I own now and I always make it though the day with this.

• I prefer the wheel and button layout of the R10 because it's more familiar.

So basically my only reason to go for the R7 would be to have a more future proof body, which is more robust, has a bigger battery and more megapixels. But I really wonder if the megapixels is something to go for or not. The price difference here is €1.700 (R7) vs €900 (R10). You can get quite a cool EF or RF lens for that difference.

So What do you think I should do? Get a more future proof body for almost double the money or try out the R10 which ticks most of the boxes for me and settle with less good specs.

Hello everyone, I currently use a Canon Rebel T7 and am looking to upgrade to a mirrorless system for bird photography, which is a serious hobby of mine. I've narrowed my options to the Canon EOS R7 and the EOS R10, both with the RF 18-150mm lens.

Currently, there's approximately a 300-400 euro price difference between the two. I can afford the additional cost of the R7, but if I choose the R10, I could purchase the R10 with the lens and the RF 100-400mm. With the R7, I would have to wait to get the amazing 100-400.

I understand the R7 has IBIS, a higher resolution sensor and sealing. Will these features make a significant difference for bird photography as a hobbyist? Does anyone here have experience with these cameras for bird photography? I do a lot of landscape and nature photography as well.

I would greatly appreciate your help!

I enjoyed using Canon 200D so much, because of it's compact size and weight. To be honest, if that 200D had ibis and 4k video with C-Log, It would be my dream camera.

Now I am selling all my ef lenses and dslrs, i want to fully move to the R line up, and What really bothers me is that...

The R 10 is veeeery lightweight! sooooo pleasy for my hands because I don't even feel like I am carying something.

But the R 7 is a beast apsc camera. It has both ibis and log, and better battery life with bigger battery and of course, weight.

So I should choose between ibis and log, or the compact size ans weight. The problem is that R10 looks a little bit cheaper visually, and that makes me want to go with R7. But I am afraid that because of the weight I won't use it as much as I would use the R10, as it is much heavier.

I want it for an everyday camera that will always be with me wherever I go. I know everything about the cameras, just wanted to hear your opinions, what do you think, if you have one of them, what you like and what you don't, and what you will chose in my case?

Hello, I want to buy a used camera. I basically have no experience with cameras (dslr/mirrorless). The most “experience” i have is owning a canon 80d for 2 days and taking like 5 pictures in total.

I have found both a R10 and a R7 for relatively decent price. R10 (2600-2500 aed or $680) and R7 (3200 aed or $900). The R7 is just the body and i have no lenses. The R10 comes with an extra battery and 15-45mm + 55-200mm kit lens.

I want to start doing car photography with 0 experience.

Based on the prices, which one do yall think is better for me to get and which one is worth spending the money on?

Hello everyone,

I would like to start animal photography and I need advice when it comes to chosing a camera.

It would be for animal photography, as I said, but also for travelling. I'm thinking about the R7 and the R10 and I have a few questions to help me in my decision:

- I’ve seen the versatile RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM lens. Is it suitable for landscapes on an APS-C sensor? Or is it really frustrating not to have a wide enough angle?

- Between the R10 (within my budget) and the R7 (a bit above what I’d planned but not out of the question either), I’m hesitating because what worries me about the R10 for wildlife photography is that I’ve read it doesn’t have image stabilisation. I’m worried that might be a problem with a 100-400mm-type telephoto lens. Is that the case? Or is the stabilisation built into the lens enough to compensate?

Thanks a lot :D

Hi all, I’ve done some searching but only found older threads. Not sure how much camera tech changes. Question I have 2 dogs and a son and find myself always outdoors either hiking /lake or beach so I have been looking into a wildlife setup. Is the R10 with the 100-400 lenses perfectly fine? Or is the R7 that much better. For reference I have never owned a camera just my iPhone 11

I have some basic knowledge on how camera sensors work and I wanted to ask

Since the R7 takes 32.5MP photos and the R10 takes 24MP photos, both on the same sensor size, that means the pixels on the R7 are much smaller and therefore, capture less light, leading to worse low light performance. Is that true?

I currently have the canon R10 and I love it except for handheld videos and how shaky it is. Would the R7 be a better option because of its image stabilization? Thanks in advance!

Hi guys, I currently have an R10, and am thinking about upgrading to the R7 as I have paid gigs (Engagements, birthday shoots, etc, maybe even weddings in the future). This body upgrade costs around 370$ (I'm trading in the R10).

I'm going for the R7 because it has a few upgrades from R10 like IBIS, higher MP, dual slots, better video capabilities, and bigger battery.

I mainly see threads saying that crop sensors are used for wildlife, sports etc but do you guys think that the R7 can be used for wedding photography and huge corporate events?

Hi everyone! I'm unfortunately needing to upgrade my camera after mine (Nikon d3500) was stolen. I loved my Nikon setup, however, with the newer camera releases, I think it's time to switch to canon. I am currently looking at the R10 or R7 with the 18-150 kit lens, an additional 50 f1.8, and eventually a sigma 150-600 for aviation photography. I typically shoot portraits, travel, and aviation mainly as a hobbyist and for friends, however, I am interested in shooting more family portraits in the future as paid gigs.

My question is this--shooting stills exclusively and only shooting paid gigs 1-2x/year right now, is the R7 worth the upgrade? From everything I've read, I believe the R10 will be adequate for my needs, however, I am concerned that I may regret not getting the higher spec body after a year or two. Is an extra 500GBP worth it to future-proof a new camera or should I buy the R10 now and save some money? I'd love to hear about experience with both cameras and lens recommendations!

Concerns about the R10:

-weather proofing- my d3500 wasn't weather-proofed and was fine in a dusty barn, but I'm unsure of canon build quality)

-megapixels- is 24 vs 32 really going to make a difference in picture quality

Thanks for your input!

Update: I bought the r10 in order to spend more money on lenses and I’m really loving it! It’s a HUGE upgrade from my Nikon and the autofocus is fantastic for portraits. I think the kit 18-150 is surprisingly good for a kit lens and the 50 1.8 is spectacular for the price.

I currently have the r100 and looking to upgrade  to either r10 or r7. I know the r7 is definitely the better camera but it's also double the price. I only take photos for fun and usually do plane spotting or street photography. Would it be better to save a little longer and get the r7 or would I be ok with the r10? i currently only have the rf 18-45 kit lens and rf 55-210. Hoping to get the rf-100-400 soon. Any info and advice is much appreciated.

So, I'm a long time Canon owner. I started decades ago with good old film SLRs (A1, Elan, etc.) then moved to the crop sensor Digital SLRs (20D, then 70D).

Have decided my 70D is getting a bit "long in the tooth" and also the body and lenses are a bit heavy/bulky for travel. I used to do more "sports shooting" when the kids were in school and doing sports, and the 70D was great for its weather sealing and ability to handle some "bigger zooms" I had, but not really something I'm using it for.

I was originally looking heavily at the R7 and R6 mkii as replacements for my 70D, but after trying them out in the camera shop, I thought the R6 mkii would be just a bit too heavy/bulky a system, especially with moving to FF Lenses.

I was pretty set on the R7 with its lighter set-up, although I wasn't happy with the wonky little joystick...

Then the salesperson pulled out the smaller R10. At first, I thought it was too small and plastic, but after holding it a bit, I actually thought it could be a great camera for travel/hiking/etc.

Only downsides I see of the R10 is:

1. No IBIS. But I will purchase new RF-S Lenses if I get the R10, which will come with IS), so how much does IBIS help above the IS lenses? And the salesperson mentioned something about the R10 having "electronic stabilization" instead of IBIS? How much will IBIS help if I'm using IS lenses. And I don't really shoot in video - only photos.

2. Smaller Battery. This is a bit of a concern, I will usually shoot a few hundred photos on a travel day. Can the little R10 battery handle that? but i shoot almost only as "photos".. very little video. I'm ok bringing one extra battery.

3. Slightly worse EVF and LCD viewfinder. My eyes aren't great (I use glasses and readers), so it's important to have a good view through the EVF. How much better is the R7 EVF to the R10?

4. No Weather Sealing. Not really a big concern. I will usually have either a camera bag or a camera case, and if its bad weather, I just wont shoot.

5. No Sensor Protection. This is a concern. My 70D protects the sensor and does an automatic clean of it. How big a risk is it having a sensor that isn't protected.

6. Anything else I could be missing?

Money isn't a big issue for me, but I do like the weight savings of the R10 over the R7, and the money saved may help me to buy a second lense.

Lens Set-Up:

For either set-up, I'm thinking of the RF-S 18-150 IS (primary travel lens), RF-S 10-18 IS (landscape travel), and RF 35mm IS 1.8 (which will work as a 50mm "indoor" lense for low light situations.)

What do you think of these lens options?

Thanks for the help.

Regards,

Michael

Im trying to figure out if I should purchase the r7 or r10. Im currently using the canon t8i and want to upgrade to mirrorless. I mainly use my camera for family photos and for work. I'm a hairstylist and use my camera for portrait photos of my clients and videos for social media. Not sure if it matters but a lot of what is shoot is in a studio salon. I'm in Wisconsin so during fall/winter I'm having to shoot with artificial light because it's getting darker out. Which one should I go with?? TIA.

Upgrading from a Canon 60D with 24mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm and a 10-22mm.

Looking to take photos of the family/kid. Portraits, home videos, sports (soccer game) , and some of the photography would be trying to capture that perfect frame/shot, so having a high shots per second is a must. I figured upgrading to any of these bodies Id also get the RF lens adaptor so I can use my EF and EF-S lenses. Eventually I plan to sell them and upgrade to new tech lenses.

I'm leaning towards the RP but I do plan to stick to this camera for another decade like I did the 60D, want to pci kthe right one.

Hi, I have used a R10 for a year now for wildlife photography, but now I have an interest in buying a R7 and selling the R10 as I heard it has better overall build and features, IBIS, and (some say) better autofocus? So, do you think it's worth?

thank you :)

Hi folks, former M4/3 user here :)

I'm seeking for a new camera, both fine for stills and cinematic videos. I think m43 is now in decay, so I consider APS-C (I also considered FF, but it's way out of my budget).

I like modern Canon lineup despite of its bulk-iness compared to other mirrorless cameras. As any m43 user I'm pretty spoiled with IBIS, so in that case R7 would be the best suitable option for me, considering my several manual lenses (and will to make short cinematic films either).

However, price of R7 (even used or slightly used) in my region is х1.8/х2.0 more than R10/R50. Is it worth of money, considering periodical shooting stills/video with manual lens?

Is the quality of footage/stills coming from R7 even x1.5 better than R10/R50? Or I should spend this money on RF lenses, which I could use in future after upgrade to an FF R-series camera?

P.S. Is there any video assists on R10/R50 such as zebras and focus peaking? And is HDR PQ, coming out from these models, any suitable for post-grading in Davinci/Premiere?

Hi, I am planning on getting my first proper camera. At this point, I’m most likely going to buy the R10 with 18-150mm lense.

A part of me is wondering if I should wait for the R7 to come back in stock and get it instead. Are the extra features worth ~£500?

Thanks :)

Yes, I know this has been talked about over and over, so I don't need too much extra insight here.

Context-

I am a beginner through and through. I am coming from a fully automatic, 8 year old point and shoot. It has a 1/2.3 sensor and a DIGIC 5 processor. Also known as very small and not very smart. I can manage to take some decent pictures with it, and I plan on keeping it and using it as I like the charm of it. However, compared to my phone, it looks quite bad. I have an iPhone 14 pro.

I own 0 lenses. I dont have a strict budget on price, as I believe that essentially anything is affordable as long as you can save up for it. That said, I dont want to be sitting here saving for a year and get an R3.

Actual post- (tldr at bottom if too long)

I will likely never use the video function on either the R10 or R7 as my phone does a spectacular job and I don't need any more than 4k60.

So really, my ultimate question is, are the extra megapixels in the r7 worth that much more if I am not likely going to spend $1000+ on any single lens? I see some people have posted here insanely sharp images of bird with their R7's but I am yet to see anything boasted like that from an R10.

What I want to shoot is a lot of things. For action, I want to shoot surfing and skateboarding. I also like to go into the city and take pictures of the skyscrapers. So, it makes me wonder if the R7 would beat it in a significant enough way to really get more detail from something like window sills if I am pixel peeping. $500 isnt a crazy amount of extra money, but I could also get an R10 with a 100-400 lens for the price of an r7 body. (is a 400mm lens long enough for shooting surfing, assuming im sitting on the sand?)

I value the speed of these cameras greatly. The R8 is too slow, so its not a part of the equation. The mechanical shutter for both is fast enough, the buffer could be an issue for the r10. I think it will be a small portion of the time where I actually use the burst mode, but when I do use it, I would want at LEAST a second of cRAW. Any less than a second isnt very usable for skateboarding.

The battery life doesnt matter much to me. I am going to be buying extra batteries regardless of the camera, even if the battery life was a year long. It's a peace of mind thing.

So, both cameras CAN shoot cRAW over a second at their fastest burst mode. Both cameras have enough battery life. Both cameras have a fast enough burst for my use case. They both are a crop sensor. They both have a DIGIC X processor. The main differences for me are the megapixels and the flash. I like using flash sometimes and it would be very convenient to use the flash on the r10 and not have to carry one.

TL;DR- Is the difference in megapixels worth 50% extra cost? The other differences are negligible.