Canon EOS R10 - a pleasant surprise :)

Hello!

Bought it for one of my daughters; guess this will be among the shortest reviews ever:

Pros: ridiculously good AF for the price (BiF really possible); IQ “as expected”; ergonomics; easy “camera to print”;

Cons: plastic, plastic, plastic, and OK, no IBIS, but at least curtain down when changing the lens… even that is missing…

Thanks!

The Silver Nemesis wrote:

Hello!

Bought it for one of my daughters; guess this will be among the shortest reviews ever:

Pros: ridiculously good AF for the price (BiF really possible); IQ “as expected”; ergonomics;

+1!  And that AF joystick - missing on the R and Rp

Cons: plastic, plastic, plastic,

+1 - the battery compartment flap is the bit I really dont like - the M6II is much better!

and OK, no IBIS,

true - equal though to the R, every DSLR canon ever made and some of the lower price mirrorless competetion

but at least curtain down when changing the lens… even that is missing…

+1 annoying yes, but like the R, Rp, M6II and much of the competition - extra care needed on changing lenses...

Enjoy!

Concise and precise review LOL.

People in online forums (DPR for example) love to trash Canon cameras because of their lack of high-end specs, but they get the job done, and the IQ is great. I have the RP and I can see an R10 in my near future to complement my close-up product shots work.

but at least curtain down when changing the lens… even that is missing…

+1 annoying yes, but like the R, Rp, M6II and much of the competition - extra care needed on changing lenses...

The R body had the shutter cover the sensor when switched off.

drsnoopy wrote:

but at least curtain down when changing the lens… even that is missing…

+1 annoying yes, but like the R, Rp, M6II and much of the competition - extra care needed on changing lenses...

The R body had the shutter cover the sensor when switched off.

oops - yes.

I've not had a big issue with my R10 and M6II's - but it is such a simple thing one would think it std.

It's the kind of camera that the M5 should have been. 80D sensor, great AF, no nonsense.

Now Canon is finally succeeding it's mirrorless 80D  it's a bit late to the party imo.  And if you like portraits (who doesn't?) the M50II has the huge advantage of being compatible to the ef-m sigma 56mm f/1.4.  And the RF 35mm f/1.8 will give you f/2.8 56mm equivalent, being just too tight for a general walk around lens, and it's equivalent max aperture isn't very exiting either, especially for the price. The RF 24mm f/1.8 is even more expensive. Last not but least the stm AF of these lenses will hold back the AF performance of the camera.  The fast focusing non L zooms aren't a great match to the typical high ISO performance of a crop camera when using shutter speeds typical for situations needing great AF. The L zooms are waaay too expensive for this budget camera. For wide angle you'll need to adapt old ef-s lenses.....  Finishing the mirrorless 80D for a new mount with only 2 crop lenses makes us wait even longer before we can shoot that mirrorless 80D with the glass it needs.

I still fail to see the headline of this camera. In combination with non L glass the AF advantage is gone.  If you're 80D + 18-135mm got broke and you don't shoot with other lenses and you're on a budget it makes sense to replace it with R10+18-150mm. If you want anything more than that I would go RP any day, as that one at least squeezes all the optical detail out of the non L RF lenses, while it sits around the same price.  A used R is even more bang for the buck, and not a whole lot more expensive these days.

thunder storm wrote:

It's the kind of camera that the M5 should have been. 80D sensor, great AF, no nonsense.

When the M5 came out - no camera had the advanced AF the R10 has - even the 1D series.  The M6II AF would have been the best a M5II would have got at that time.

Now Canon is finally succeeding it's mirrorless 80D it's a bit late to the party imo. And if you like portraits (who doesn't?) the M50II has the huge advantage of being compatible to the ef-m sigma 56mm f/1.4.

+1. Come on canon - allow a RF Sigma 56m!

And the RF 35mm f/1.8 will give you f/2.8 56mm equivalent, being just too tight for a general walk around lens, and it's equivalent max aperture isn't very exiting either, especially for the price. The RF 24mm f/1.8 is even more expensive.

+1  These are prime lenses for full frame in in any value proposition - not attractive on RFS crop.  Only vaguely useful one is the RF 16mm f/2.8 but I have the Sigma 16 f/1. for EFM.

Last not but least the stm AF of these lenses will hold back the AF performance of the camera. The fast focusing non L zooms aren't a great match to the typical high ISO performance of a crop camera when using shutter speeds typical for situations needing great AF. The L zooms are waaay too expensive for this budget camera.

To a point - that said I use albeit my EF L's on my R10 - and they work very very well. The deep (albeit narrow) grip working well.

For wide angle you'll need to adapt old ef-s lenses..... Finishing the mirrorless 80D for a new mount with only 2 crop lenses makes us wait even longer before we can shoot that mirrorless 80D with the glass it needs.

True - although I don't quite agree with the 80D analogy - only precise similarity really is 24MP, the same (albeit not crop) resolution of the R3 and R6II - which is plenty.

I still fail to see the headline of this camera. In combination with non L glass the AF advantage is gone.

True for wide angle.  There are some good options for telephoto work already - the RF100-400 and RF 85 f/2 pair nicely for starters - as do the 600 and 800 primes if they are your thing.  It pairs very nicely with lots of adapted EF lenses - for example the 60 macro, 55-250 STM or even in my view the EF 100-400 II.

If you're 80D + 18-135mm got broke and you don't shoot with other lenses and you're on a budget it makes sense to replace it with R10+18-150mm. If you want anything more than that I would go RP any day, as that one at least squeezes all the optical detail out of the non L RF lenses, while it sits around the same price. A used R is even more bang for the buck, and not a whole lot more expensive these days.

Different usage - poorer AF - slower frame rate  (much slower on RP) - and no AF joystick - and the awful touch bar on the R.  The R also has even worse rolling shutter.  Also for tele work, the crop and higher pixel density works well too for more distant subjects.  There is also evidence and Canon state that the sensor is not identical to the 80D - just like the R7 is not identical to the 90D.  Particularly in Raw and DxO one can get great images from the R10 - and far more of an action camera than either the R or RP.

We just need more lenses - Canon or Third Party which work at wide and normal range.  So for now, keeping my M series

KevinRA wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

It's the kind of camera that the M5 should have been. 80D sensor, great AF, no nonsense.

When the M5 came out - no camera had the advanced AF the R10 has - even the 1D series. The M6II AF would have been the best a M5II would have got at that time.

It was the time Canon was sleeping and didn't see the true potential of mirrorless. Now Canon sees the potential Canon is hoping there's any potential for a new aps-c system left with very fast focusing bodies and no fast focusing lenses in that price range.

Now Canon is finally succeeding it's mirrorless 80D it's a bit late to the party imo. And if you like portraits (who doesn't?) the M50II has the huge advantage of being compatible to the ef-m sigma 56mm f/1.4.

+1. Come on canon - allow a RF Sigma 56m!

And the RF 35mm f/1.8 will give you f/2.8 56mm equivalent, being just too tight for a general walk around lens, and it's equivalent max aperture isn't very exiting either, especially for the price. The RF 24mm f/1.8 is even more expensive.

+1 These are prime lenses for full frame in in any value proposition - not attractive on RFS crop. Only vaguely useful one is the RF 16mm f/2.8 but I have the Sigma 16 f/1.4 for EFM.

Last not but least the stm AF of these lenses will hold back the AF performance of the camera. The fast focusing non L zooms aren't a great match to the typical high ISO performance of a crop camera when using shutter speeds typical for situations needing great AF. The L zooms are waaay too expensive for this budget camera.

To a point - that said I use albeit my EF L's on my R10 - and they work very very well. The deep (albeit narrow) grip working well.

Yes, but the sharp EF  L's are still pretty expensive.  I got my EF 24-70mm f/2.8 mkII  for 1000 euro.  The used prices went up since I got it. The f/4.0 lenses are not in the same ballpark, especially on crop. The 70-200mm's aren't going down in price as the price of the RF options is so steep.  I got a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8  HSM Sports for 800 euro, but a deal like that is hard to find, and it's a boat anchor especially relative to a light weight body.....  A  50-100mm f/1.8 Art give more light but is reach limited and not stabilized.

For wide angle you'll need to adapt old ef-s lenses..... Finishing the mirrorless 80D for a new mount with only 2 crop lenses makes us wait even longer before we can shoot that mirrorless 80D with the glass it needs.

True - although I don't quite agree with the 80D analogy - only precise similarity really is 24MP,

Both are fast focusing 24Mp bodies. I didn't see any fast focusing 24Mp crop body since the 80D.  The 90D compares to the R7. So the 80D compares to....

the same (albeit not crop) resolution of the R3 and R6II - which is plenty.

Yeah, but full frame is squeezing more optical detail out of your lenses despite having the same pixel count. It's easier to count pixels than anything trying to measure optical detail, but nonetheless it plays an at least equally important role.

I still fail to see the headline of this camera. In combination with non L glass the AF advantage is gone.

True for wide angle. There are some good options for telephoto work already - the RF100-400

Not that sharp on crop, pretty dark aperture, DLA range.

and RF 85 f/2

Simply doesn't bring that shiny AF of the R10 to life.  Focal length isn't that flexible on crop.

pair nicely for starters - as do the 600 and 800 primes if they are your thing

Slow AF, pretty dark aperture, DLA range, not that sharp on crop.  All in all not allowing you to take true advantage in situations needing fast AF.

. It pairs very nicely with lots of adapted EF lenses - for example the 60 macro, 55-250 STM or even in my view the EF 100-400 II.

If you're 80D + 18-135mm got broke and you don't shoot with other lenses and you're on a budget it makes sense to replace it with R10+18-150mm. If you want anything more than that I would go RP any day, as that one at least squeezes all the optical detail out of the non L RF lenses, while it sits around the same price. A used R is even more bang for the buck, and not a whole lot more expensive these days.

Different usage - poorer AF -

If it's hindered by stm lenses or too dark apertures it doesn't matter anyway.

slower frame rate (much slower on RP)

I don't care, but that's just my preference, granted.

- and no AF joystick -

That's true for the RP. However, as long as the lenses don't allow for true action or event shooting it doesn't matter anyway.

Look, Canon would have made some affordable  RF  USM primes it would have been a match in heaven, but with the current stm options or the too dark non L stm zooms all those event/sports AF guiding bells and whistles don't bring you much.

For fast AF needing situations adapting EF 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses with USM/HSM  AF will work fine, however, those lenses - although being adapted options - are still pretty expensive.

and the awful touch bar on the R.

That's an argument vs the R7, but for the R10 it's 2 dials vs 2 dials (or 3 vs 3 counting the ring on lenses/adapter).  The touch bar at least gives you some extra buttons, so I would consider it an advantage to have it.

The R also has even worse rolling shutter. Also for tele work, the crop and higher pixel density works well too for more distant subjects.

That's mostly a matter of picking the right lens, and when you're needing the longest lenses you're talking about either the f/11 primes which are well in DLA range for this crop sensor and not sharp enough to really make a huge difference compared to the R, or you're talking big while L primes which are not in the same price range as this camera.  Those spending the big bucks on the big white L primes will opt for the R7 anyway.

There is also evidence and Canon state that the sensor is not identical to the 80D - just like the R7 is not identical to the 90D.

It's not identical. The Mp-counts are the same.

Particularly in Raw and DxO one can get great images from the R10 - and far more of an action camera than either the R or RP.

Raw and DxO can be used with the full frame sensor as well, so the difference remains.

We just need more lenses - Canon or Third Party which work at wide and normal range. So for now, keeping my M series

I'm using the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 HSM Art  +  Sigma 50mm f/1.4 HSM Art on my M6II, so for those lenses I'm set for crop RF camera's. If Canon ports over that 32mm and gives it faster AF that would be nice with the R10.  But I'm not going to buy it. I'm tired of Canon and crop systems. I'm not willing to spend again on a 32mm, it will certainly come with slow AF again, and the price of the R10 is really too high for what it is.

KevinRA wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

It's the kind of camera that the M5 should have been. 80D sensor, great AF, no nonsense.

When the M5 came out - no camera had the advanced AF the R10 has - even the 1D series. The M6II AF would have been the best a M5II would have got at that time.

Fuji X-T2 predates it by several months and and X-T1 has awesome af system (after the 3rd firmware update.)

Now Canon is finally succeeding it's mirrorless 80D it's a bit late to the party imo. And if you like portraits (who doesn't?) the M50II has the huge advantage of being compatible to the ef-m sigma 56mm f/1.4.

+1. Come on canon - allow a RF Sigma 56m!

And the RF 35mm f/1.8 will give you f/2.8 56mm equivalent, being just too tight for a general walk around lens, and it's equivalent max aperture isn't very exiting either, especially for the price. The RF 24mm f/1.8 is even more expensive.

+1 These are prime lenses for full frame in in any value proposition - not attractive on RFS crop. Only vaguely useful one is the RF 16mm f/2.8 but I have the Sigma 16 f/1. for EFM.

Last not but least the stm AF of these lenses will hold back the AF performance of the camera. The fast focusing non L zooms aren't a great match to the typical high ISO performance of a crop camera when using shutter speeds typical for situations needing great AF. The L zooms are waaay too expensive for this budget camera.

To a point - that said I use albeit my EF L's on my R10 - and they work very very well. The deep (albeit narrow) grip working well.

For wide angle you'll need to adapt old ef-s lenses..... Finishing the mirrorless 80D for a new mount with only 2 crop lenses makes us wait even longer before we can shoot that mirrorless 80D with the glass it needs.

True - although I don't quite agree with the 80D analogy - only precise similarity really is 24MP, the same (albeit not crop) resolution of the R3 and R6II - which is plenty.

I still fail to see the headline of this camera. In combination with non L glass the AF advantage is gone.

True for wide angle. There are some good options for telephoto work already - the RF100-400 and RF 85 f/2 pair nicely for starters - as do the 600 and 800 primes if they are your thing. It pairs very nicely with lots of adapted EF lenses - for example the 60 macro, 55-250 STM or even in my view the EF 100-400 II.

If you're 80D + 18-135mm got broke and you don't shoot with other lenses and you're on a budget it makes sense to replace it with R10+18-150mm. If you want anything more than that I would go RP any day, as that one at least squeezes all the optical detail out of the non L RF lenses, while it sits around the same price. A used R is even more bang for the buck, and not a whole lot more expensive these days.

Different usage - poorer AF - slower frame rate (much slower on RP) - and no AF joystick - and the awful touch bar on the R. The R also has even worse rolling shutter. Also for tele work, the crop and higher pixel density works well too for more distant subjects. There is also evidence and Canon state that the sensor is not identical to the 80D - just like the R7 is not identical to the 90D. Particularly in Raw and DxO one can get great images from the R10 - and far more of an action camera than either the R or RP.

We just need more lenses - Canon or Third Party which work at wide and normal range. So for now, keeping my M series

I don’t think Canon is marketing the R10 for professional use, at least not as a primary camera. But for amateurs and hobbyists like me, it’s a powerful little camera. I sold my RP and replaced it with the R10 for these reasons: slightly smaller and lighter than the RP, especially when using an RF-S lens; greater versatility (much better FPS); greater reach for wildlife at lower lens cost; newer processor; improved eye/subject tracking; feels just as good in hand as the RP; works nicely with two EF-S lenses using EF to RF adapter; RF-S 18-150 lens offers nice range.

The RP served me well and I got it to experience full-frame photography. For my needs, though, I’ve learned that full-frame is not necessary.

I like using R10, the results I get when taking photographs, and I expect it to meet my needs for years to come.

YouMeandtheDogs wrote:

I don’t think Canon is marketing the R10 for professional use, at least not as a primary camera. But for amateurs and hobbyists like me, it’s a powerful little camera. I sold my RP and replaced it with the R10 for these reasons: slightly smaller and lighter than the RP, especially when using an RF-S lens; greater versatility (much better FPS); greater reach for wildlife at lower lens cost; newer processor; improved eye/subject tracking; feels just as good in hand as the RP; works nicely with two EF-S lenses using EF to RF adapter; RF-S 18-150 lens offers nice range.

The RP served me well and I got it to experience full-frame photography. For my needs, though, I’ve learned that full-frame is not necessary.

I like using R10, the results I get when taking photographs, and I expect it to meet my needs for years to come.

I agree with your assessment of the R10 - a lot of capability in a small package.  However, I am thinking of adding a refurbished RP body at the current $599 price just to use with the RF35/1.8 lens which I bought with the R10, and maybe the RF15-30 which I can pick up for $450.

The other route would be to buy a used EF-S 10-18 with adapter for $200 and use that for wide angle on the R10.   I'm curious as to which EF-S lenses you are using on the R10 and how you think they compare to the RF lenses on an RP.

Ultimately I would probably buy an RF-S 11-22 or 22mm prime if they get released next year.

Rich Jacobson wrote:

YouMeandtheDogs wrote:

I don’t think Canon is marketing the R10 for professional use, at least not as a primary camera. But for amateurs and hobbyists like me, it’s a powerful little camera. I sold my RP and replaced it with the R10 for these reasons: slightly smaller and lighter than the RP, especially when using an RF-S lens; greater versatility (much better FPS); greater reach for wildlife at lower lens cost; newer processor; improved eye/subject tracking; feels just as good in hand as the RP; works nicely with two EF-S lenses using EF to RF adapter; RF-S 18-150 lens offers nice range.

The RP served me well and I got it to experience full-frame photography. For my needs, though, I’ve learned that full-frame is not necessary.

I like using R10, the results I get when taking photographs, and I expect it to meet my needs for years to come.

I agree with your assessment of the R10 - a lot of capability in a small package. However, I am thinking of adding a refurbished RP body at the current $599 price just to use with the RF35/1.8 lens which I bought with the R10, and maybe the RF15-30 which I can pick up for $450.

The other route would be to buy a used EF-S 10-18 with adapter for $200 and use that for wide angle on the R10. I'm curious as to which EF-S lenses you are using on the R10 and how you think they compare to the RF lenses on an RP.

Used a 10-18 on the 7D and was pretty good - and would buy again only I have the EFM 11-22 for the M series

Ultimately I would probably buy an RF-S 11-22 or 22mm prime if they get released next year.

+1 for the 11-22 RFS.  Has to be coming surely as the current glaring gap.

The 22mm EF-M I found the copy I had underwhelming - only real plus was size and less of a benefit on a R10.

I do quite like the 16mm RF though on both the R10 and R5 as a fun (not perfect) little lens.

KevinRA wrote:

Rich Jacobson wrote:

YouMeandtheDogs wrote:

I don’t think Canon is marketing the R10 for professional use, at least not as a primary camera. But for amateurs and hobbyists like me, it’s a powerful little camera. I sold my RP and replaced it with the R10 for these reasons: slightly smaller and lighter than the RP, especially when using an RF-S lens; greater versatility (much better FPS); greater reach for wildlife at lower lens cost; newer processor; improved eye/subject tracking; feels just as good in hand as the RP; works nicely with two EF-S lenses using EF to RF adapter; RF-S 18-150 lens offers nice range.

The RP served me well and I got it to experience full-frame photography. For my needs, though, I’ve learned that full-frame is not necessary.

I like using R10, the results I get when taking photographs, and I expect it to meet my needs for years to come.

I agree with your assessment of the R10 - a lot of capability in a small package. However, I am thinking of adding a refurbished RP body at the current $599 price just to use with the RF35/1.8 lens which I bought with the R10, and maybe the RF15-30 which I can pick up for $450.

The other route would be to buy a used EF-S 10-18 with adapter for $200 and use that for wide angle on the R10. I'm curious as to which EF-S lenses you are using on the R10 and how you think they compare to the RF lenses on an RP.

Used a 10-18 on the 7D and was pretty good - and would buy again only I have the EFM 11-22 for the M series

Ultimately I would probably buy an RF-S 11-22 or 22mm prime if they get released next year.

+1 for the 11-22 RFS. Has to be coming surely as the current glaring gap.

The 22mm EF-M I found the copy I had underwhelming - only real plus was size and less of a benefit on a R10.

I do quite like the 16mm RF though on both the R10 and R5 as a fun (not perfect) little lens.

I thought that I would prefer a 35mm prime for indoor use, and the RP body is the same price as the RF 24mm lens, so why not use it with the 35?  That way I also have both a full frame and crop sensor body with the same controls and battery.  If I don’t find the RP to be of any value, I won’t lose much on resale.

Rich Jacobson wrote:

KevinRA wrote:

Rich Jacobson wrote:

YouMeandtheDogs wrote:

I don’t think Canon is marketing the R10 for professional use, at least not as a primary camera. But for amateurs and hobbyists like me, it’s a powerful little camera. I sold my RP and replaced it with the R10 for these reasons: slightly smaller and lighter than the RP, especially when using an RF-S lens; greater versatility (much better FPS); greater reach for wildlife at lower lens cost; newer processor; improved eye/subject tracking; feels just as good in hand as the RP; works nicely with two EF-S lenses using EF to RF adapter; RF-S 18-150 lens offers nice range.

The RP served me well and I got it to experience full-frame photography. For my needs, though, I’ve learned that full-frame is not necessary.

I like using R10, the results I get when taking photographs, and I expect it to meet my needs for years to come.

I agree with your assessment of the R10 - a lot of capability in a small package. However, I am thinking of adding a refurbished RP body at the current $599 price just to use with the RF35/1.8 lens which I bought with the R10, and maybe the RF15-30 which I can pick up for $450.

The other route would be to buy a used EF-S 10-18 with adapter for $200 and use that for wide angle on the R10. I'm curious as to which EF-S lenses you are using on the R10 and how you think they compare to the RF lenses on an RP.

Used a 10-18 on the 7D and was pretty good - and would buy again only I have the EFM 11-22 for the M series

Ultimately I would probably buy an RF-S 11-22 or 22mm prime if they get released next year.

+1 for the 11-22 RFS. Has to be coming surely as the current glaring gap.

The 22mm EF-M I found the copy I had underwhelming - only real plus was size and less of a benefit on a R10.

I do quite like the 16mm RF though on both the R10 and R5 as a fun (not perfect) little lens.

I thought that I would prefer a 35mm prime for indoor use, and the RP body is the same price as the RF 24mm lens, so why not use it with the 35? That way I also have both a full frame and crop sensor body with the same controls and battery. If I don’t find the RP to be of any value, I won’t lose much on resale.

Indoor use - including shallow DOF at wider angle - RP no brainer here at current discount price

I am adapting EFS 15-85 USM as workaround lens, EF 70-200 f/4 L as telephoto. Both are not expensive in used market. Throw a RF 35mm f1.8 or even 50mm f1.8 for low light, I am all covered.

Comparing to RP:

1. R10 has no limitation on silent mode, you can use in any mode and assign a custom button.

2. Operation feels a little (much?) snappier than RP due to new processor.

3. You can assign video setting to any user setting which you cannot do on RP.

4. R10 can do 4k with dual pixel focus, and 4k 60p although cropped.

Full frame, I use A7c due to lens selection. Don't like sony apsc body that is why choosing R10.

Fotoland wrote:

I am adapting EFS 15-85 USM as workaround lens, EF 70-200 f/4 L as telephoto. Both are not expensive in used market. Throw a RF 35mm f1.8 or even 50mm f1.8 for low light, I am all covered.

Comparing to RP:

1. R10 has no limitation on silent mode, you can use in any mode and assign a custom button.

2. Operation feels a little (much?) snappier than RP due to new processor.

3. You can assign video setting to any user setting which you cannot do on RP.

4. R10 can do 4k with dual pixel focus, and 4k 60p although cropped.

Full frame, I use A7c due to lens selection. Don't like sony apsc body that is why choosing R10.

I almost decided to buy the R10 body only to pair it with the EFS 15-85.

But then I realized that the AF might not work well for video, since is a relative old lens.

I ended up buying the R10 with the 18-150 kit, I’m missing the wider 15mm but I’m hoping Canon release the 11-22 early this year to cover the wider portion.

If not I could get the RF16 and the Laowa 9mm or Rokinon 10mm when they make it available for RF.

However, I’m curious how your 15-85 works with your R10.

Photato wrote:

Fotoland wrote:

I am adapting EFS 15-85 USM as workaround lens, EF 70-200 f/4 L as telephoto. Both are not expensive in used market. Throw a RF 35mm f1.8 or even 50mm f1.8 for low light, I am all covered.

Comparing to RP:

1. R10 has no limitation on silent mode, you can use in any mode and assign a custom button.

2. Operation feels a little (much?) snappier than RP due to new processor.

3. You can assign video setting to any user setting which you cannot do on RP.

4. R10 can do 4k with dual pixel focus, and 4k 60p although cropped.

Full frame, I use A7c due to lens selection. Don't like sony apsc body that is why choosing R10.

I ended up buying the R10 with the 18-150 kit, I’m missing the wider 15mm but I’m hoping Canon release the 11-22 to dover the wider portion.

If not I could get the RF16

RF 16mm works nicely on the R10 - and the barrel distortion induced border/corner sharpness issue seen on FF on digital correction is a non issue

KevinRA wrote:

Photato wrote:

Fotoland wrote:

I am adapting EFS 15-85 USM as workaround lens, EF 70-200 f/4 L as telephoto. Both are not expensive in used market. Throw a RF 35mm f1.8 or even 50mm f1.8 for low light, I am all covered.

Comparing to RP:

1. R10 has no limitation on silent mode, you can use in any mode and assign a custom button.

2. Operation feels a little (much?) snappier than RP due to new processor.

3. You can assign video setting to any user setting which you cannot do on RP.

4. R10 can do 4k with dual pixel focus, and 4k 60p although cropped.

Full frame, I use A7c due to lens selection. Don't like sony apsc body that is why choosing R10.

I ended up buying the R10 with the 18-150 kit, I’m missing the wider 15mm but I’m hoping Canon release the 11-22 to dover the wider portion.

If not I could get the RF16

RF 16mm works nicely on the R10 - and the barrel distortion induced border/corner sharpness issue seen on FF on digital correction is a non issue

Yes, that is the silver lining on crop sensors. They pick the best part of FF lenses.

I bet Canon designed the RF16 with such extreme distortion think on crop bodies.
It is small and in my wish list.

Photato wrote:

I almost decided to buy the R10 body only to pair it with the EFS 15-85.

But then I realized that the AF might not work well for video, since is a relative old lens.

I ended up buying the R10 with the 18-150 kit, I’m missing the wider 15mm but I’m hoping Canon release the 11-22 early this year to cover the wider portion.

If not I could get the RF16 and the Laowa 9mm or Rokinon 10mm when they make it available for RF.

However, I’m curious how your 15-85 works with your R10.

I had the kit lens RFS 18-45, it is sharp. Just not fun of the collapsed design. I also feel the 15-85 USM lens has better colour, maybe just me. It is sharp in both short and long ends. Only downside you have to adapt. Hope there will be a RF version soon as it has a really good range 24-135mm equivalent and good optics.

I only used 15-85 for still, focus is fast and accurate. Did not try video with it as it is a bit awkward to handhold long time. For video, used RF 35mm f1.8 IS STM.

Fotoland wrote:

Photato wrote:

I almost decided to buy the R10 body only to pair it with the EFS 15-85.

But then I realized that the AF might not work well for video, since is a relative old lens.

I ended up buying the R10 with the 18-150 kit, I’m missing the wider 15mm but I’m hoping Canon release the 11-22 early this year to cover the wider portion.

If not I could get the RF16 and the Laowa 9mm or Rokinon 10mm when they make it available for RF.

However, I’m curious how your 15-85 works with your R10.

I had the kit lens RFS 18-45, it is sharp. Just not fun of the collapsed design. I also feel the 15-85 USM lens has better colour, maybe just me. It is sharp in both short and long ends. Only downside you have to adapt. Hope there will be a RF version soon as it has a really good range 24-135mm equivalent and good optics.

I only used 15-85 for still, focus is fast and accurate. Did not try video with it as it is a bit awkward to handhold long time. For video, used RF 35mm f1.8 IS STM.

I've always liked that lens on my M50.  On the R10 the fast USM  AF will shone even more.