Upgrading from M50- Do I go R7 or R10?

[Cranfordrd]

Hi, new member here looking for some advice. I purchased my first camera about 4 years ago, a Canon M50. I shoot birds (using a Tamron 18-400) and recently playing around with landscapes and some macro (using a vintage Canon FD 70-210 ). The autofocus for birding is not great, low light is not great, I really want a couple of presets I can customize so I can go from birds in flight to perched birds easily. I decided on a R7 BUT it is kind of big and heavy for me (I do lots of hiking and walk 2-3 miles with the camera so weight and size is important). Camera shop recommended an R10. I would like this camera to meet my needs for a long time and focus next on a good wide angle lens for landscapes. Is the AF on the R10 much better the what I have on the M50? Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated!

 

[Archibald]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

I don't own the M50 or the R10, but do own the R7. There are lots of websites that compare the R10 and R7. The R10 is smaller and lighter and will be more suitable for hiking. However, once you hang a big lens on the camera, the difference isn't much.

I love my R7. I use it with the RF 100-500mm and RF 100mm macro lenses. Those are good lenses and the hi-rez R7 sensor takes advantage of that.

Unfortunately, Canon does not make pro quality lenses for the mirrorless crop format. Landscape photographers usually demand excellent lenses for landscapes. The new Sigma RF lenses might fill that gap. I don't know if it would make a difference to you. The consumer-grade Tamron might be sufficient. To get the full benefit of the R7 sensor, you need good lenses.

While I love my R7, it is far from a perfect camera. It suffers from rolling shutter effects when on electronic shutter. Lots of folks complain about its autofocus issues. What they say is right. I can usually overcome the issues by overshooting, but it is something to be aware of.

There are lots of rumors out there that Canon will soon release an R7 Mark II to fix the issues. Others say it won't happen for years. In the end, nobody knows.

You are in a great position now to be able to choose the right camera for you.

 

[StevenAunan]

Welcome! Here's my two cents. A few years before I retired, I bought the M6. Today I own an R5 Mark II and an R7. Here's the sequence of purchases: M6 > 7DII > R7 > R6 > R5II.

Knowing what I know now, I would not buy the R7 again. Autofocus and low-light performance is not very good, but better than the 7DII. Mechanical "shutter shock" can cause image blur in certain situations, and electronic rolling shutter deforms moving objects. However, it does have Image Stabilization and the R10 does not.

Of the two cameras being considered, I would opt for the R10 and use the savings to buy a better lens.

However, the R10 has a 24.2 megapixel APS-C sensor, and full-frame sensors perform much better in lower light. For that reason, I would seriously consider the 24.2 MP full-frame R8 (which rivals the sensor in the more expensive R6 Mark II).

The R10 weighs 0.84 lbs, R8 1.0 lbs, R7 1.1 lbs.

As you can see from the chart, the dynamic range of the R10 and R7 is very similar at the same ISO settings, and only slightly better than the M50. The R8 is on an entirely different level, and the refurbished price direct from Canon is only $50 more than the R7. Both the R10 and R8 lack features available in the R7, but from an image quality perspective, I think the R8 is the winner.

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting (photonstophotos.net)

 

[Archibald]

All the measurements will prove that full frame is better. But in most viewing situations, it is hard or impossible to tell whether the photo was taken by a full frame camera or crop. Or phone even.

IMO dynamic range is overrated and not an issue in most situations. OK, it can help dig detail out of deep shadows, rescue severely underexposed shots, and do single-shot HDR for high contrast scenes. That can be useful at times. But for most routine photography, it provides no advantage.

I use my R7 for bird and bug photography. My R5 has significantly better dynamic range but it stays home. I don't need 12 stops of DR to capture scenes that only have 10 stops of DR, to display on a monitor with 8 stops of DR.

Interesting - I see an ISO of 3276800 on that axis!

 

[Cranfordrd]

Welcome! Here's my two cents. A few years before I retired, I bought the M6. Today I own an R5 Mark II and an R7. Here's the sequence of purchases: M6 > 7DII > R7 > R6 > R5II.

Knowing what I know now, I would not buy the R7 again. Autofocus and low-light performance is not very good, but better than the 7DII. Mechanical "shutter shock" can cause image blur in certain situations, and electronic rolling shutter deforms moving objects. However, it does have Image Stabilization and the R10 does not.

Of the two cameras being considered, I would opt for the R10 and use the savings to buy a better lens.

However, the R10 has a 24.2 megapixel APS-C sensor, and full-frame sensors perform much better in lower light. For that reason, I would seriously consider the 24.2 MP full-frame R8 (which rivals the sensor in the more expensive R6 Mark II).

The R10 weighs 0.84 lbs, R8 1.0 lbs, R7 1.1 lbs.

As you can see from the chart, the dynamic range of the R10 and R7 is very similar at the same ISO settings, and only slightly better than the M50. The R8 is on an entirely different level, and the refurbished price direct from Canon is only $50 more than the R7. Both the R10 and R8 lack features available in the R7, but from an image quality perspective, I think the R8 is the winner.

Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting (photonstophotos.net)

View attachment 31764

Great info and I will look into it but since bird photography is the majority of what I shoot I was sticking to APS-C for more reach without the bigger lens.

 

[StevenAunan]

After experiencing the R7's noise I bought a refurb R6 and was blown away by the difference in low light. I agree it doesn't matter in "most situations" but it definitely matters in early morning or early evening. After spending half my life using cheaper gear, I can finally afford what I think is the "best" camera for me. For some folks, that might be the R10. Honestly, I'm amazed at what $1,000 can buy today.

 

[ctitanic]

After experiencing the R7's noise I bought a refurb R6 and was blown away by the difference in low light. I agree it doesn't matter in "most situations" but it definitely matters in early morning or early evening. After spending half my life using cheaper gear, I can finally afford what I think is the "best" camera for me. For some folks, that might be the R10. Honestly, I'm amazed at what $1,000 can buy today.

I owned the R7 and I went through the route of buying a refurbished R6. It will cost less than buying a new R7 and it will perform a lot better.