topic Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10 in EOS DSLR & Mirrorless Cameras

Should I get the Canon EOS R10

carla11 — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 06:32:16 GMT

Hi everyone. im recently getting into photography, i love to take pictures of the night sky and have gotten really good pictures on my phone. i also host volleyball events and want to take some action shots. ive used my friends r50 and some pictures came out blurry. ive done hours and hours of research and keep landing on the R10. i know camera bodys come and go, and lenses are forever. can someone please tell me what lens would be good to capture action shots for outdoor volleyball, and what lens would be good to capture night sky pictures.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

shadowsports — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 10:47:15 GMT

Although you didn't mention budget, If you have the means, I'd look at a R8 mkII which was announced today. It will provide superior low light, night time performance. It has IBIS and an electronic shutter of capable of capturing up to 40 frames a second. The R10 isn't a bad camera, but for night time sky photography and sports it wouldn't be my first choice.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

LeeP — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 14:45:51 GMT

Although I am sour on the R8 II from the standpoint of upgrading from my R8 (i.e. not enough of an advancement for me to take the financial hit of buying a new body), I share your opinion that the R8 II is a great beginner camera even if the price has gotten steeper vis a vis the R8. The R8 II is still a lot of camera for a reasonable price. IBIS seems to address a need that Carla has.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

stevet1 — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:24:10 GMT

carla11,

I personally am saving up for an R10 with an 18-150mm lens, so I applaud your choice.

*Grin* 😀

Steve Thomas

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

LeeP — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:31:18 GMT

Honest question: what do you find attractive about the R10? I'm genuinely curious.

I have a friend who has been mulling over a new camera for a year who is not a hobbyist.

When I bought in to my first mirrorless I could make a case for an R7 and and R100, but the "tweeners" i.e. the R10 and R50 less so. As you are aware, I went with the "K1000" of the line, the R100.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

stevet1 — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 15:52:10 GMT

Lee,

For me, it's a good all-rounder camera. It's light, portable and does a lot of stuff.

I personally am an APS-C kind of person. Full-frame is just not that attractive to me.

It's got a 24mp sensor, which is all I need and a Digic X processor, which is what I want.

The best recommendation I ever read was a guy who said, "It's the kind of camera that you just throw it in a bag, and it works."

Steve Thomas

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

ebiggs1 — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 16:20:21 GMT

. can someone please tell me what lens would be good to capture action shots for outdoor volleyball, and what lens would be good to capture night sky pictures.”

I will address the lens part of the issue because the right camera and the wrong lens will still be a problem. I never did volleyball until a few years ago I got asked to do the KC Challenge corporate event. I don’t recommend the 50mm lens as a rule but for volleyball it worked great. For astronomy work I suggest the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 Lens full manual. I would buy these lenses and give them a go before buying a new camera.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

ebiggs1 — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 16:28:23 GMT

Here’s the point, the best camera in the world will not necessarily make you the best photographer in the world. Of course the new better features are always welcome. The R50 can certainly take astro and volleyball photos. However, as suggested getting the best camera you can afford is the better course of action.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

shadowsports — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 17:03:43 GMT

Steve,

I can respect your feelings. The R8 mkII is double the price of a refurbished R10. In its defence, you're getting quite a bit more camera at that price point. IBIS and 4k/60 video without crop are real pluses. It's also going to have a more modern focusing and tracking algorithm.

For @carla11's benefit.

These differentiators are what cost more. Since both sensors are 24.2 megapixels, the lower pixel density of the R8 mkII has significantly more light gathering capability than the crop sensor of the R10. Even though the difference between the two sensors is only about 1.5 stops, the shadow recovery and ISO performance at base ISO between the two sensors is significant for someone looking for cleaner images, shot in dim or low light scenarios. The R10 shoots a respectable 15 FPS in mechanical shutter, up to 23 in electronic first curtain with a max burst capability of 30 FPS in RAW burst mode with a 75% crop. These are captured in a single roll-like movie file. You can go in and extract individual frames. Usable for some but not everyone. On the R8 mkII you shoot up to 40 FPS with no crop. These are individual files. The R10 crops in order to clear it's buffer more quickly.

It doesn't matter what I would do. I'm only pointing out differentiators between the two body's and making justification for full frame over crop. There is nothing wrong with the EOS R10, It just wouldn't be my first choice for night sky (especially) and sports. Maybe we'll get her budget and that's certainly an important factor to be mindful of. Hope this helps. 🙂

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

LeeP — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 17:41:31 GMT

"It's the kind of camera that you just throw it in a bag, and it works."

Funny, that's what I say about the R100.

Digic X is "better" than Digic 8 for certain, but I didn't need the extra capacities so I chose to save a bundle. I don't do video, or bursts, or shoot fast action as a rule.

It sounds like Carla would indeed be better off with a Digic X camera. Although I do agree with Rick that if th budget allows, an R8 II is worth considering.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

stevet1 — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 18:25:50 GMT

Lee,

I am a great believer in the aphorism, "Buy the fastest processor that you can afford."

And it's not just the burst mode. It seems like everything else flows from that.

Steve Thomas

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

LeeP — Wed, 16 Sep 2026 19:46:09 GMT

Maaaaaaybe. If I had to give up one of my Canons, the R8 would be gone gone gone. My experience with both the R8 and the R100 is the same duration--three years--and the R8 is temperamental where the R100 never is. I've learned to keep a spare battery for the R8 and when that battery is rejected, put it in the R100 and run it out to the end.

Re: Should I get the Canon EOS R10

SignifDigits — Thu, 17 Sep 2026 11:58:54 GMT

So we haven't heard from the OP again yet. Lenses. For Volleyball and other sports the 70-200mm f/2.8 is tough to beat IMO. Pricey, but an amazing lens. 50mm on an APS-C could work at ebiggs points out, but on a full-frame the 70-200mm would be my choice. On APS-C maybe the Sigma 16-300 could be another good budget-friendly choice. I've gotten some good soccer shots with that.

For night sky pics it's harder to get wide on the APS-C, and full-frame does much better there. The Rokinon ebiggs mentioned is a favorite. I use my RF15-35mm f/2.8 there with some success.

Blurry on an R50 would translate to blurry on an R10 IMO. They are essentially the same camera with just a few different firmware and control differences. Blurry might be due to depending upon the camera settings and not being right for the situation. If you're shooting action you should set the shutter speed to capture it and maybe set ISO to auto and then aperture to get the lighting right. If you're shooting in a dark situation you could get some noise.

I'd say get the best lenses you can for your situation and go as cheap as you can on a camera. For your situation I'd consider a used RP to get into full-frame. In this forum (including myself) I think sometimes we get over-enamored of the so much better AF, etc. that Canon keeps whetting our appetites with. If you're starting out the RP is all the camera you really need to take some great photos. Sure, if you can afford to get better, get better.

I enjoy my R6Mark II and would pick it over the new R8 MarkII for the $100 difference personally for photography. I enjoy my R50V and would probably pick a R50 over the R10 and put the $320 price difference into lenses. I notice they are both out of stock on the Canon site.

The Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM is a great budget lens to consider. The Rokinon ($380), a RF 24-105mm ($460) and the R5 ($680) (or used RP at about the same price point) could provide barrels of fun for less than the price of the R8MarkII body alone. Sigma 16-300mm @$700 would be a way to get wider range at more $$.

That said, the "blurry" R50 shot and success with the phone camera indicate to me that we also need to deal with expectations of a dedicated camera doing the same "magic" that phone cameras do. They do not. Dedicated cameras still require learning the basics of photography and applying them to get the shot one can often get automagically with a phone camera.