Here are the Canon EOS R7 and Canon EOS R10
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
I think we need to appreciate these cameras are clearly 90D/Rebel cameras and will be very affordable. The R7 will likely be $1399 so lets look at what you get for $1399.
15FPS mechanical (Electronic will be unusable due to lag and rolling shutter)
Buffer - Buffer is likely to be very good.
AF - Amazing eye tracking from the R5/R6, does any other cheaper camera have this?
Weather resistant.
32.5mp APSC Sensor
Dual Card Slots
There are a lot of weaknesses with this camera with the EVF, lack of third dial, terrible rolling shutter, weird button placement. But at an affordable price I suspect many people will put up with those to get the features on offer. If you can't afford an R6 what other options do you have for 15fps and animal eye tracking which are arguably very important things for wildlife.
15FPS mechanical (Electronic will be unusable due to lag and rolling shutter)
Buffer - Buffer is likely to be very good.
AF - Amazing eye tracking from the R5/R6, does any other cheaper camera have this?
Weather resistant.
32.5mp APSC Sensor
Dual Card Slots
There are a lot of weaknesses with this camera with the EVF, lack of third dial, terrible rolling shutter, weird button placement. But at an affordable price I suspect many people will put up with those to get the features on offer. If you can't afford an R6 what other options do you have for 15fps and animal eye tracking which are arguably very important things for wildlife.
Upvote
0
I know I'm in the minority here, but I'm interested in seeing how the new location of the wheel feels ergonomically. Overall I'm excited to pick this up as my new main (only) body from my 7D II, the EVF resolution is the largest concern, but it's definitely not a dealbreaker and I generally trust Canon's decision making.
Upvote
0
Yep, the EVF is the biggest cripple hammer by far. If anyone has used the R6/R5 side by side the difference in clarity and quality is huge. So, the fact the R7 is worse than the R6 means it will be very crunchy and digital. I would love to hear from RP shooters how they find their EVF.
Upvote
0
I'm doubtful the price will be that low, but if Canon did manage such a competitive price, I would definitely opt for the R7 over the R10.
Upvote
0
I totally agree and that is exactly what I want, an updated APSC BSI sensor in an R6 body. However it appears Canon have not replaced the 7D2 but have replaced the 90D with the R7. The naming convention is what has made it very confusing as we all want an R7 to be a 7D3. However, Canons market research must have told them they will sell a lot more 90D/R7 at $1399 then a 7D3/R7 at $2499.
Upvote
0
I can see it being useful, for me it would be much more efficient just sliding my finger sideways to change aperture rather than pulling down my thumb, especially if I'm just holding the camera with one hand.
Upvote
0
Considering the 90D was $1199 3 years ago and the m6II $850 which both used the same sensor, I can't see this body being any higher than $1399-$1499. It also uses the RP EVF and is missing a number of features of more expensive gear.
Upvote
0
As has been discussed here many times, the sales of a pro level crop camera were clearly not high enough to have a camera that fills this niche and that niche alone. The 7D series was never updated to a mark III, which it would have been if it followed Canon's typical timeline. Nikon's D500, while getting great reviews from reviewers and consumers, never got a newer generation update either. The fact that Canon released the 90D rather than a 7D III with specs that were not pro level, but higher than the 80D, seemed to indicate that a compromise between the two lines was the path that Canon considered profitable. So, it could be quite possible that the R7 follows the same strategy. Not 7D level, but more along the lines of the 90D.
Which, for me - and presumably many of us - would fit with who we are and what we actually need as photographers. I'm no pro, but an enthusiast that does a lot of bird photography. If the price is right (and a pro level camera would certainly be more than I can afford) than this may be a great fit. I will care about the AF system, not whether or not it has a MF/AF switch on the front of the camera (a no-brainer good idea, it seems to me). I will care about FPS (And that seems to be confirmed as plenty good enough.) I will care about size and weight - and unlike many others, I think the R7 is a very good size for those wanting something close to the R5 and R6 (just a bit smaller and lighter). The R10 would be a great option for me if the R7 is too pricey as it would be a wonderful size and weight paired with my RF 100-400. The R10 would also be very suitable size and weight wise with the RF 100-400. Not sure why this seems absurd to say, but I care image quality, size and weight, and AF ability, not the fact that is has a newly positioned back dial (seems like it might be a really good place for it. I often have a bit if trouble manipulating the second top dial. I always liked the second back dial on the 6D). I care about what the photos look like, not what the camera looks like.
I sold my R6, but kept my 100-400 hoping for an RF crop camera. So, I'm looking forward to what these two cameras will offer.
But others, feel free to continue to whine and complain about the smallest little things that don't meet your personal desires. The more forum members whine and complain, the more convinced I become that Canon has made some really good decisions!
Which, for me - and presumably many of us - would fit with who we are and what we actually need as photographers. I'm no pro, but an enthusiast that does a lot of bird photography. If the price is right (and a pro level camera would certainly be more than I can afford) than this may be a great fit. I will care about the AF system, not whether or not it has a MF/AF switch on the front of the camera (a no-brainer good idea, it seems to me). I will care about FPS (And that seems to be confirmed as plenty good enough.) I will care about size and weight - and unlike many others, I think the R7 is a very good size for those wanting something close to the R5 and R6 (just a bit smaller and lighter). The R10 would be a great option for me if the R7 is too pricey as it would be a wonderful size and weight paired with my RF 100-400. The R10 would also be very suitable size and weight wise with the RF 100-400. Not sure why this seems absurd to say, but I care image quality, size and weight, and AF ability, not the fact that is has a newly positioned back dial (seems like it might be a really good place for it. I often have a bit if trouble manipulating the second top dial. I always liked the second back dial on the 6D). I care about what the photos look like, not what the camera looks like.
I sold my R6, but kept my 100-400 hoping for an RF crop camera. So, I'm looking forward to what these two cameras will offer.
But others, feel free to continue to whine and complain about the smallest little things that don't meet your personal desires. The more forum members whine and complain, the more convinced I become that Canon has made some really good decisions!
Upvote
0
Confirmed R7 price in euros is 1500. Nice! R10 is 1200. I guess I'll be going with the R7.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
