Is the Canon EOS R10 Mark II Coming in Q4 2026?

[ashmadux]

It'll be interesting to see how the R10 evolves in terms of specs and pricing. The R7ii is supposedly going upmarket which might leave a gap to fill. Spec-wise I could imagine the R10ii not only getting the 32mp sensor from the R7, but also the IBIS unit. If IBIS is included I´d expect the price to go up, making pricing more difficult because the competition with these types of cameras.

This sounds...too far fetched for canon.

The crop sensors have hit a self imposed wall, which alone is half the battle for the IQ sensitive amongst us; The designs are utterly lackluster (in comparison to m50/m62 design direction), and ibis is a pipe dream; canon doesn't allow cameras under 1500.00 or so to have ibis - call it a luxury tax if you will. The r7 debuted at 1500.00, so that holds. R8 sold well so theirs no motivation for them to add ibis there.

As well, pigs have been flying for few years now, so anythings possible. But canon...nah. They just don't care enough (22f2 cough cough).

 

[EthenJ]

How many entry-level cameras does Canon need ?

Right now, there's the R100, R50, R10, and maybe the R50 V.

A thing to remember is that the R10 is almost 4 years old now.

That's old! It's longer than any of the M-series lasted without a refresh, or most DSLRs, or pretty much any of the R-series except for the Rp. Its looking increasingly questionable at its price point, hence it really is overdue for a refresh like the R7.

 

[EthenJ]

This sounds...too far fetched for canon.

The crop sensors have hit a self imposed wall, which alone is half the battle for the IQ sensitive amongst us; The designs are utterly lackluster (in comparison to m50/m62 design direction), and ibis is a pipe dream; canon doesn't allow cameras under 1500.00 or so to have ibis - call it a luxury tax if you will. The r7 debuted at 1500.00, so that holds. R8 sold well so theirs no motivation for them to add ibis there.

As well, pigs have been flying for few years now, so anythings possible. But canon...nah. They just don't care enough (22f2 cough cough).

Yeah... I would put money on an R7 sensor with no IBIS, too.

 

[Dragon]

Right now they think it's 3. Sounds about right to me, too. One as cheap as possible, one sensible entry level and one slightly above that.

Nobody looks at the R50V for photography and the rumored R10 ii will be replacing the current R10, so stays at 3.

5 years ago they had basically 9! 90D, 77D, 850D, 250D, 2000D, 4000D! And don't forget M6 ii, M50 ii and M200.

I don't think either the 90D or the M6II qualify as "entry level". Both very capable cameras, as is the 77D.

 

[xmarijan]

It was said a long time ago that we might get two APS-C lenses as well:

1. One more PZ lens beside 14-30mm
2. One fast prime

I wonder if Canon is going to release both before summer or one of them is going to come together with the R10 Mark II

 

[davidespinosa]

A thing to remember is that the R10 is almost 4 years old now.

That's old! It's longer than any of the M-series lasted without a refresh, or most DSLRs, or pretty much any of the R-series except for the Rp. Its looking increasingly questionable at its price point, hence it really is overdue for a refresh like the R7.

I asked honestly, how many entry-level cameras does Canon need ?
I didn't suggest that they should have more or less.
And I didn't suggest that they shouldn't refresh the R10.

 

[zamorano]

I guess there are more amateur photographers than professionals by a wide margin. But professional equipment brings more profit per unit, and Canon concentrates on that - possibly because they can't produce big quantities of cameras or don't want to invest into expanding. I'm not sure if the R10 is entry level, it's kind of a step up from that (although beginner friendly for sure), but besides the R8 the next camera up the hierarchy is the pro R7. There's not much of a middle ground, and the lens choice reflects that as well: we get the lowly kit zooms that start at f4 and end at f6.7, and the professional L stuff with not much in between.

Let's hope this changes with the R10ii, I guess it's probable, as @Exploreshootshare stated, that R10ii should get similar or better software than R50V, and Canon will upgrade the hardware at least to be able to say they did (which should make it capable of higher spec 4k video, maybe even less rolling shutter but I'm not holding my breath for that - it seems very probable for the R7ii, though). This alone would polish the current wrinkles and make it a very good enthusiast camera. With IBIS, it would be killer.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

professional equipment brings more profit per unit, and Canon concentrates on that

How do you imagine that they would focus on amateur equipment?

 

[neuroanatomist]

But professional equipment brings more profit per unit, and Canon concentrates on that - possibly because they can't produce big quantities of cameras or don't want to invest into expanding.

Please check basic facts before posting. Canon sells more cameras than any other manufacturer, by a wide margin. They have done so for over two decades. Most of the cameras that Canon sells are ‘entry-level’, such as the R50.

Yes, Canon (like many other manufacturers) is trying to push users to FF bodies and lenses to drive margins, and they’re succeeding in general. A decade ago the ILC market was 90% APS-C. A few years ago it was 75% and last year it was 64%. But the majority of cameras sold are APS-C and most of those are not high end (obvious because the average unit cost of ILCs in 2025 was $671).

 

[zamorano]

Please check basic facts before posting. Canon sells more cameras than any other manufacturer, by a wide margin. They have done so for over two decades. Most of the cameras that Canon sells are ‘entry-level’, such as the R50.

Yes, Canon (like many other manufacturers) is trying to push users to FF bodies and lenses to drive margins, and they’re succeeding in general. A decade ago the ILC market was 90% APS-C. A few years ago it was 75% and last year it was 64%. But the majority of cameras sold are APS-C and most of those are not high end (obvious because the average unit cost of ILCs in 2025 was $671).

Agreed completely. Off the top of my head, crop bodies outsell full frame by 3 to 1 or 4 to 1 (or was it the professional vs. enthusiast?) But profit per unit sold is much higher for professional equipment, and my understanding is that if one has supply chain problems it is natural to focus on maximising per-unit revenue. Once Canon had more APS-C models than full frame ones, I know that time has passed and will never come back, and the lens choice for EF-S was never equal to that of EF lenses but there were some nice lenses. Today the choice of L lenses might even be better than before but for the rest I don't think it is (show me a nice RF-S lens?) They could have brought over some EF-M lenses to the RF mount, as various EOS-Ms were number one sellers for years, but I'd say their priorities lie elsewhere.

On the other hand, I would love that Canon bring everyone to full frame. I'm under the impression the introduction of the R ecosystem was aiming for that, and it kind of makes sense for Canon given the history of EOS cameras from 35mm onward. There being a sub-1000 priced full frame camera (the R8) is pretty groundbreaking and hopefully a sign of the things to come but currently it's neither here nor there, and the continuous economic crises aren't helping either.

 

[Dragon]

but for the rest I don't think it is (show me a nice RF-S lens?) They could have brought over some EF-M lenses to the RF mount, as various EOS-Ms were number one sellers for years, but I'd say their priorities lie elsewhere.

It depends on what you consider "nice". With the possible exception of the RF-s 55-210, all the RF-s lenses reasonably support the resolution of the R7, whereas many of the EF-s lenses were looking long in the tooth on a 90D. I agree that bringing the EF-M 22mm and 32mm lenses over would be nice, but the RF 16mm pancake and RF 28mm f/2.8 are both excellent for RF-s use, and maybe the deal with Sigma is designed to let them have a chunk of that space. Remember, the overall market is much smaller than it was 10 years ago, so too much duplication is not cost-effective for manufacturers even if it seems attractive from a consumer perspective. It is notable that if fast is equivalent to "nice", then Sigma has that base pretty well covered https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/products/Mirrorless-Camera-Lenses/ci/17912/N/4196380428?filters=fct_brand_name:sigma:REGULAR,fct_lens-mount_3442:canon-rf:REGULAR and that may well be the plan given the limited overall market.