Canon released the APS-C EOS R series

[sub68]

Summary

 Canon released the EOS R 7 and R10

The R7 is a 32.5MP with dual SD card slots and LP e6 battery type.

The R10 is a 24MP with single SD with rebal series battery type.

 

Quotes

Spoiler

Canon is expanding its EOS R Series of mirrorless cameras with the introduction of two APS-C models: the R7 and R10. This is a notable announcement, since these APS-C cameras are equipped with the RF mount, meaning they are fully compatible with existing full-frame RF lenses and, via an adapter, can work with EF and EF-S glass (though sadly not the EF-M series). While the mount is the same, Canon is releasing a couple of new RF-S lenses for APS-C format imaging alongside the new bodies.

My thoughts

 The R7 feels like a mirrorless version of the 7D line up which is cool and I do like the inclusion of the dual SD card slots and LPe6 batteries.

The eos R10 doesn’t look like a xxD line (70d, 80d) more like a 77d or a apsc version of a EOS RP. There isn’t a monitoring jack.

but these are my opinion and probably just me.

 

Sources

 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/news/canon-expands-lineup-with-eos-r7-and-r10-mirrorless-cameras

[Origami Cactus]

Funny how Canon just can't keep themselves from kicking their cameras into the kneecaps with a baseball bat, they just have to do it each time.

Ancient sensor in both of them with horrible readout speeds, this is why both 1080p 120fps, and 4k 60fps are either 480p quality because of the lineskipping, or because of a massive 1.8x crop over the tiny sensors already existing 1.6x crop, making for a total of 2.88x crop factor, smaller than a 1inch sensor.
And those viewfinders with 2.63million dots (note, they count each RGB subpixel separately, so this will tell a bit about the actual resolution of the viewfinder) belong in 2014, not 2022.

But I guess people will still buy them, because the autofocus is good and most importantly, Canon is on top of the box.

Canon could make a good camera if they had to, but they just choose each time to dent the camera with the Cripple hammer.

[Electronics Wizardy]

14 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:

Funny how Canon just can't keep themselves from kicking their cameras into the kneecaps with a baseball bat, they just have to do it each time.

Ancient sensor in both of them with horrible readout speeds, this is why both 1080p 120fps, and 4k 60fps are either 480p quality because of the lineskipping, or because of a massive 1.8x crop over the tiny sensors already existing 1.6x crop, making for a total of 2.88x crop factor, smaller than a 1inch sensor.
And those viewfinders with 2.63million dots (note, they count each RGB subpixel separately, so this will tell a bit about the actual resolution of the viewfinder) belong in 2014, not 2022.

But I guess people will still buy them, because the autofocus is good and most importantly, Canon is on top of the box.

Canon could make a good camera if they had to, but they just choose each time to dent the camera with the Cripple hammer.

DO they really cripple it that much compared to the other brands? 

 

Looking at the competition for the r10 in the about $1000 dollar aspc mirrorless camera we have the xs-10, a6400/a6600, and z50. Compared to the others the r10 is the only to have 4k60, so while its cropped, the others don't even offer it. The 2.6 million dot viewfinder is about par or a bit better than the computers. The readout speed in e shutter is pretty bad(but really not a huge issue I'd say, I have used burst on e shutter on my r5 with no noticeable artifacts), but with the mech shutter it still gets 15fps which is on par or better than most completion. I wish it was better of course, but its not really bad compared to the competitors. Basically every company cripples the low end products compared to the higher end ones, otherwise why would anyone buy the high end models.

[Origami Cactus]

20 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

DO they really cripple it that much compared to the other brands? 

 

Looking at the competition for the r10 in the about $1000 dollar aspc mirrorless camera we have the xs-10, a6400/a6600, and z50. Compared to the others the r10 is the only to have 4k60, so while its cropped, the others don't even offer it. The 2.6 million dot viewfinder is about par or a bit better than the computers. The readout speed in e shutter is pretty bad(but really not a huge issue I'd say, I have used burst on e shutter on my r5 with no noticeable artifacts), but with the mech shutter it still gets 15fps which is on par or better than most completion. I wish it was better of course, but its not really bad compared to the competitors. Basically every company cripples the low end products compared to the higher end ones, otherwise why would anyone buy the high end models.

Yeah, the R10 is whatever, we are not even going to talk about that, it is a modern day rebel, so whatever.

But the R7? It costs as much as an entry level fullframe (both from Nikon OR Canon themselves).

Compare it to X-T3 and it's shortcomings are obvious. Both can do 30FPS E-Shutter, but the backside illuminated sensor in X-T3 is actually fast enough to have a point in using it. And all the countless other things. Yes it has much better video autofocus, but I would say overall X-T3 is better for the money.

[Electronics Wizardy]

23 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:

Yeah, the R10 is whatever, we are not even going to talk about that, it is a modern day rebel, so whatever.

But the R7? It costs as much as an entry level fullframe (both from Nikon OR Canon themselves).

Compare it to X-T3 and it's shortcomings are obvious. Both can do 30FPS E-Shutter, but the backside illuminated sensor in X-T3 is actually fast enough to have a point in using it. And all the countless other things. Yes it has much better video autofocus, but I would say overall X-T3 is better for the money.

Doesn't the xt3/xt4 only have 20fps with the e shutter, if you want 30 you need a crop. The r7 also has a good amount more megapixels. 

 

Compared to a entry level full frame like a eos r for a simmilar cost, you get a much faster burst, ibis, better af, better video, and a overall better camera. For a lot of users where the extra sensor size won't matter, or you want the extra crop, a high end crop body makes a good amount of sense. I really only see full frame pull ahead a good amount when your pushing low light hard.

[Origami Cactus]

9 minutes ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Doesn't the xt3/xt4 only have 20fps with the e shutter, if you want 30 you need a crop. The r7 also has a good amount more megapixels. 

 

Compared to a entry level full frame like a eos r for a simmilar cost, you get a much faster burst, ibis, better af, better video, and a overall better camera. For a lot of users where the extra sensor size won't matter, or you want the extra crop, a high end crop body makes a good amount of sense. I really only see full frame pull ahead a good amount when your pushing low light hard.

That is correct, 30fps at 16mpix, 20 at 26mpix. But the rolling shutter is well controlled. In my conclusion the eos r7 is just okay, and won't match whatever fuji releases in 7 days.

But it is a start, and won't hopefully be another dead Canon APS-C mount after a few lens releases.

[Distinctly Average]

1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Doesn't the xt3/xt4 only have 20fps with the e shutter, if you want 30 you need a crop. The r7 also has a good amount more megapixels. 

 

Compared to a entry level full frame like a eos r for a simmilar cost, you get a much faster burst, ibis, better af, better video, and a overall better camera. For a lot of users where the extra sensor size won't matter, or you want the extra crop, a high end crop body makes a good amount of sense. I really only see full frame pull ahead a good amount when your pushing low light hard.

The R5 in crop mode is 17mp. So if you took a shot front the same distance with the same lens, then resized so both images match in post the R5 would show more noise and less detail. So for many, the R7 makes a lot of sense. I have FF and APS-C gear and for wildlife and macro the C gear wins time after time.

 

The viewfinder is just .39 inches, so given the res I reckon it will be fine. The more important things IMO are refresh rate, pixel response time and colour range. Those look to be very good, but I guess I will find out in a few weeks when I am using one. Not much point in guessing until we actually get to try it. Most people who have say the viewfinder is excellent, but I want to see for myself.

[sub68]

5 hours ago, Origami Cactus said:

because of a massive 1.8x crop over the tiny sensors already existing 1.6x crop, making for a total of 2.88x crop factor, smaller than a 1inch sensor.

I think that's the M50's... the canon 90D from what I have learned doesnt have a crop besides the 1.6

5 hours ago, Origami Cactus said:

And those viewfinders with 2.63million dots (note, they count each RGB subpixel separately, so this will tell a bit about the actual resolution of the viewfinder) belong in 2014, not 2022.

I have used R6's viewfinder its a really good one

2 hours ago, Distinctly Average said:

The viewfinder is just .39 inches, so given the res I reckon it will be fine. The more important things IMO are refresh rate, pixel response time and colour range. Those look to be very good, but I guess I will find out in a few weeks when I am using one. Not much point in guessing until we actually get to try it. Most people who have say the viewfinder is excellent, but I want to see for myself.

Agreed, I have used a Panasonic GX85 vs a R6 and the GX85 has a very bad color and refresh is bad but I discovered the R6 is just great.

[Origami Cactus]

19 hours ago, sub68 said:

I think that's the M50's... the canon 90D from what I have learned doesnt have a crop besides the 1.6

The Caon R7 And R10 both have that massive crop in 4k 60fps, but r7 also has an option for lineskipped video, so something that looks like 480p.

19 hours ago, sub68 said:

I have used R6's viewfinder its a really good one

Yeah, the Canon R6 has a pretty good 3.69 million dot  EVF, so  1280 x 960 pixels.

But the R7 and R10 have a very 2014  1024 x 768 pixels.

[Distinctly Average]

3 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:.

Yeah, the Canon R6 has a pretty good 3.69 million dot  EVF, so  1280 x 960 pixels.

But the R7 and R10 have a very 2014  1024 x 768 pixels.

Will be interesting to see how well it performs. Not worth getting fixated on resolution there.

[sub68]

5 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:

Yeah, the Canon R6 has a pretty good 3.69 million dot  EVF, so  1280 x 960 pixels.

But the R7 and R10 have a very 2014  1024 x 768 pixels.

Does the resolution really matter with 1in sq EVF?

7 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:

The Caon R7 And R10 both have that massive crop in 4k 60fps, but r7 also has an option for lineskipped video, so something that looks like 480p

I haven’t seen anything about that.

[Origami Cactus]

8 hours ago, sub68 said:

Does the resolution really matter with 1in sq EVF?

I mean, does the resolution of something you put 1 inch away from your eyeball and that covers your whole vision when using it matter?

I would say yes, extremely

[sub68]

4 minutes ago, Origami Cactus said:

I mean, does the resolution of something you put 1 inch away from your eyeball and that covers your whole vision when using it matter?

I would say yes, extremely

*stares at 1080P screen from 1in away* Yes I can see pixels but I would argue that there is enough to do composition and focus. 

But that's just me we all have preferences, I still don't think that a EVF is a fail point of a camera its something to work with and get used to, something that can be trainned to work.

[porina]

Haven't used a modern mirrorless camera (yet) but these are starting to make some sense that, if I were to ever move on from my 7D2 I'd consider it. Basically the only thing I'd pay to upgrade from DSLR is better moving subject AF tracking. Everything else is a side-grade at best and not worth paying for. I still wonder if I'd like an EVF as opposed to TTL-OVF. Still, it'll be incredibly expensive to swap from DSLR to any modern mirrorless system that is comparable just as a hobby.

 

Also find it interesting the comments on video. To me, these are still primarily stills cameras and video is a sideline. If you are focusing on video first then that's a different set of considerations.

[sub68]

1 hour ago, porina said:

Also find it interesting the comments on video. To me, these are still primarily stills cameras and video is a sideline. If you are focusing on video first then that's a different set of considerations.

Alot of people just don't want that they just like to go head first in video.

I think it stems from people thinking video wil always be primary.

I do agree but cant think of a reason.

2 hours ago, porina said:

Still, it'll be incredibly expensive to swap from DSLR to any modern mirrorless system that is comparable just as a hobby.

not really if you stick with canon to canon you just need the body and there lens adapter.

batteries are the same, same SD, just a new body and lens mount

but thats just me looking at it.

[Origami Cactus]

I have changed my mind since seeing a bit more about the camera (r7). The r10 is still a rebel for me.

 

The R7 has the same autofocus of the R3, but because of the 32mp sensor, it enables more cropping than the Canon R5. (more pixels per inch)

It is weathersealed, dual slot, enabled a crop factor on telephotos and it can even be cropped further.  Electronic shutter being bad doesn't matter for wildlife, because you would want to use mechanical shutter anyways for the better noise performance. The EVF being so-so doesn't matter, because of the very good autofocus, so no need to manually focus. It doesn't matter it doesn't have APS-C lenses, because the telephoto lenses will be about the same size anyways between APC-S and fullframe. 15 frames per second is more than good enough for wildlife, with mechanical shutter. And I guess video doesn't matter too much, so they get away with using front-side illuminated sensor, because image quality for stills will still be enough.

 

So it definitely is a good wildlife camera, which it set out to do. 

[sub68]

3 hours ago, Origami Cactus said:

So it definitely is a good wildlife camera, which it set out to do. 

yeah, the 7D was set up to be wildlife and amateur sports camera.

3 hours ago, Origami Cactus said:

The r10 is still a rebel for me

Me too it just feels like it, no monitoring jack really?