Canon R10 Review - The perfect entry-level camera?

I have owned the Canon EOS R10 for more than a year now and have taken countless photos with various lenses. Is this small, compact and affordable camera suitable for serious wildlife photography, especially bird photography? This video is about my experiences with the autofocus, image quality, operation and more.
You can buy the equipment used in the video here (affiliate links):
Canon R10 bhpho.to/3QxcfEH
Canon RF 70-200 f/2.8 L IS bhpho.to/3Hmmu9w
Canon RF 100-400 f/5.6-8 IS bhpho.to/474osGx
Canon RF 100-500 f/4.5-7.1 L IS bhpho.to/45FriR5
Canon LP-E17 bhpho.to/3Sd2NaM
SanDisk 64 GB SDXC V30 bhpho.to/3z1J1r7
SanDisk 64 GB SDXC V90 bhpho.to/3wXdJBq

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

You can buy the camera here (affiliate links): Canon R10 bhpho.to/3QxcfEH

[@robertlawrence7958]

A very balanced review. It's absolutely amazing how much technology is packed into these 'entry level ' cameras these days. I most certainly wouldn't complain about any of the limitations with these cameras considering the difference in price when compared to say an R5 or R6. I'm about to purchase a used R8 as a backup . This will replace an RP body that I've had for a while now. I must admit to being slightly biased against crop sensor bodies but if I wasn't then I would definitely consider the R10. The best thing about all the bodies I have mentioned is the weight. As a backup to my two main cameras, having a really lightweight body is perfect.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

The R8 is an amazing camera!

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

Thanks for a comprehensive review. I mostly photograph song birds, so my RF 100-500 lives on my camera 95% of the time. But in choosing a body, I was very torn between the R7 and R10. In the end, I opted for the R7 because I thought it provided for more flexible options e.g. 3 custom modes, more customizable buttons, dual card slots, larger batteries, a higher resolution sensor, etc. I was very impressed by the R10, but I think the R7 is worth the relatively small price difference unless you're looking for simpler controls,

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

If it was my main body, I would also have gone for the R7, especially when pairing it with the RF100-500. however, I think for beginners that go for the RF100-400 and want an inexpensive camera the R10 makes sense

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

​@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Your combination clearly gives incredible value for money. But I have a friend who bought the R10 with the RF 100-400, which was such a gratifying experience that he's now devoting more time to his hobby than he had originally expected. As a result, he's now kicking himself for not having invested in the R7 with the RF 100-500, as he feels limited by his choice, particularly in terms of customizability and resolution. So there may be some advantage to considering future needs, though it's obviously a tough call.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

I totally agree! In two years he will have the R1 and RF 600/4 😅

[@wellingtoncrescent2480]

In terms of autofocus performance, it probably isn't down to the processing unit, since the R5, R10, and R7 all use the Digic X. Most commenters therefore attribute the difference to slower read-out speeds, which leave less time for AF calculations. So a faster readout might improve both the rolling shutter and AF performance. That said, I don't think the hit on AF performance is noticeable unless you also shoot with a higher-end model, like the R5. At least that's my experience with the R7, which is my main body. In fact, I would likely upgrade to an R7 Mark II if it improved the read-out speed, though a higher resolution EVF to better judge image quality in the field would also be nice, as the current 2 million dots is antiquated.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

I also assume it’s mainly the readout speed

[@MaxPower_Designs]

Hey Fabian, I just started in photography and bought the R10 after seeing your first video about it. I’m having mixed results at the moment and would love a complementary video if possible for a page by page settings you use for wildlife photography with the R10. Thanks for the review.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

I did one for the R7, which has almost the same settings

[@Vaquero_interestelar]

I absolutely agree with you. I really like this camera, but the AF is inconsistent at times. It's not that they are out of focus, but the focus is very soft. Also, it happens to me that I want to set the iso on the dial that controls the aperture and I can't. I hate that, because I want it to be as close to my R5 as possible so I don't get confused. Even my M5 gives me three dials and this R10 doesn't. But in general I like it. Greetings from Chile.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

Thanks for sharing your experiences

[@teneka76]

That is the camera i am using today Canon R10. I am very satisfied with it. I am using the Rf100-400,#Rf800 and it works well. Any setting for bird fotografering?

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

Perfect! I did a setup guide for the R7, the R10 is very similar

[@pilisipixelek2558]

Hello, which would you say is better next to a Tamron - Sigma 150-600 mm? Canon r10 vs r8? Often in the forest, in low light.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

If reach is not a big issue then the R8

[@RoyDumaw]

Hello, Fabian. I've been birding for a year now with a bridge camera, the Nikon P950, my first and only camera. I'm wanting to move to the "body + lens" world but I'm a little worried the difference in zoom reach is going to disappoint me. I'm considering a Canon R7 + RF 100-400, it is the most my budget allows. Is the reach enough for someone used to the P950? I know it's not the same, but I'm not sure in practice how big of a difference it really is when out in the wild birding.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

Hmm, I‘m not sure. You will definitely need to get closer to your subjects. What about the RF800/11?

[@RoyDumaw]

@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I'll check this one out. Wouldn't F11 be too close aperture for wildlife? The F8 in the RF-100-400 is the main complaint about that lens from what I see. I've never had any lenses so all I'm saying is just from what I'm learning online. So forgive me.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

It depends. I did a review of the RF800/11, maybe check it out

[@RoyDumaw]

​@@FabianFoppNaturephotography I will. Thanks.

[@korkutdemirbas]

Nice review. Doesn't the number of pictures that can be taken with a camera depends heavily on internal memory? Your result with different cards seems a little bit off.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

Of course the buffer plays a role. But depending on which card you have, it will be very different. I tested this with more than 10 camera, card speed matters a lot

[@korkutdemirbas]

@@FabianFoppNaturephotography After your review, I have purchased a V90 card and my results are similar to yours when using Electronic 1st curtain. For "Electronic drive" mode, the gain of using v90 card instead of v30 looks less (at ISO 3200 v30 = 20 frames till buffer is full (ftbf), v90= 24 ftbf and at ISO800 v30= 26 ftbf, v90= 36 ftbf). One may decide to change the drive mode from H+ to H for an acceptable electronic drive performance.

[@FabianFoppNaturephotography]

It‘s not only important how long it takes to fill the buffer, but also how quickly it empties again. And usually here is where the card makes the big difference. For example, you could try how many images you can take with each cards when pressing the shutter for 20 seconds

[@korkutdemirbas]

@@FabianFoppNaturephotography That's right. It took about 5.5 seconds to clear the buffer for v30 card, where as it took only 2.5 seconds for v90. Anything in between, v90 card has a clear advantage.