Canon mirrorless upgrade
Discussion
I’ve no hands-on of either of those. I went from 5D3 to R3.
However, if I were in your position, I’d stick with full frame, so R8.
But, of course, which lenses to you have? What do you photograph mostly? Will you be sticking with your EF mount lenses?
However, if I were in your position, I’d stick with full frame, so R8.
But, of course, which lenses to you have? What do you photograph mostly? Will you be sticking with your EF mount lenses?
Edited by Tony1963 on Friday 3rd January 09:36
thebraketester said:
I only have 2 lenses left. 50mm f1.4 and L24–105mm. I am also verging towards the r8 I just wonder if it will feel a bit small.
I have big hands, so have always avoided the smaller cameras. Also, the R8 is very menu driven, few buttons. Another minus point for me. I went with an R8 about 18 months ago and for my uses its been fantastic. The size works for me, in that I find myself using it and taking places whereby a full day carrying it causes me no issues even with a couple of lenses in the bag too. Stick just a single lens (versatile) on for the day and for me it's a winning combo over the shoulder.
I just get the feeling that someone used to a 5D2 ‘might’ not like the size and menu-heavy arrangement.
That’s for the op to decide, as some people want to simplify their gear, others want a genuine upgrade in all areas. In which case a used or grey import R6ii might be worth saving for.
That’s for the op to decide, as some people want to simplify their gear, others want a genuine upgrade in all areas. In which case a used or grey import R6ii might be worth saving for.
I went from 5dII to R6 and I wish I'd moved to Sony.
The RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than the original L series EF lenses. Also most of the RF lenses are not as good as EF lenses, they rely on in camera manipulation. Without it the distortion is often terrible. Also Canon don't let any other company use the RF mount including the electronics, so there aren't any third party genuine RF lenses, although this might be about to change,
Sony has a much wider range of lenses, they are cheaper and the GM lenses are usually better than the similar RF L lenses.
If you've got a lot of EF L lenses you want to keep, then fair enough, might be cheaper to stay with Canon if you don't mind using the EF-RF adapter, but if not, I'd go with Sony.
Having said all that, the R6 and probably now the R6 II, is near perfect for an amateur. It's not as fluid to use as the 5dii or iii, some of the enjoyment is replaced by having to remember more buttons and menu info but I can get more keeper shots than before with eye detection and better stabilisation. But still, the best shots I've ever taken were with a 5dii.
The RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than the original L series EF lenses. Also most of the RF lenses are not as good as EF lenses, they rely on in camera manipulation. Without it the distortion is often terrible. Also Canon don't let any other company use the RF mount including the electronics, so there aren't any third party genuine RF lenses, although this might be about to change,
Sony has a much wider range of lenses, they are cheaper and the GM lenses are usually better than the similar RF L lenses.
If you've got a lot of EF L lenses you want to keep, then fair enough, might be cheaper to stay with Canon if you don't mind using the EF-RF adapter, but if not, I'd go with Sony.
Having said all that, the R6 and probably now the R6 II, is near perfect for an amateur. It's not as fluid to use as the 5dii or iii, some of the enjoyment is replaced by having to remember more buttons and menu info but I can get more keeper shots than before with eye detection and better stabilisation. But still, the best shots I've ever taken were with a 5dii.
It's obviously not that relevant for the OP, but I went from a 5D3 to an R5 (mark 1), and couldn't be happier. The body is a bit smaller, but handles similarly to the 5D3.
I've stayed with my EF lenses and just have the RF/EF converter permanently attached to the R5, rather than considering moving to the RF lenses - in fact, I only recently added an EF11-24mm f4L and can see no reason for not continuing with EF lenses for the foreseeable future.
I guess the biggest improvements for me have been:
- Quick and accurate focussing - especially using eye tracking.
- The EVF when shooting in low light - it's really helpful actually being able to see what you're shooting!
- The in body IS, which has again helped a lot in low light.
In terms of the OP, it very much depends on what they want to be shooting, but certainly for me, I'd be sticking with full frame. I first tried full frame with a 5D1, moving from a 40D, and have never looked back.
If the OP is looking to stay with full frame, then I would imagine a R6ii would perhaps be a better option than the R8 for similar handling to the 5D2.
Just throwing this last thought out there, but the R6ii body is £2000 at WEX without the EF/RF adapter, and although older, the R5(i) can be had for £2400 including adapter from HDEW (grey import, although I've bought a lot of stuff from them without any issues), or a used example from MBP for between £1800 and £2200.
I've stayed with my EF lenses and just have the RF/EF converter permanently attached to the R5, rather than considering moving to the RF lenses - in fact, I only recently added an EF11-24mm f4L and can see no reason for not continuing with EF lenses for the foreseeable future.
I guess the biggest improvements for me have been:
- Quick and accurate focussing - especially using eye tracking.
- The EVF when shooting in low light - it's really helpful actually being able to see what you're shooting!
- The in body IS, which has again helped a lot in low light.
In terms of the OP, it very much depends on what they want to be shooting, but certainly for me, I'd be sticking with full frame. I first tried full frame with a 5D1, moving from a 40D, and have never looked back.
If the OP is looking to stay with full frame, then I would imagine a R6ii would perhaps be a better option than the R8 for similar handling to the 5D2.
Just throwing this last thought out there, but the R6ii body is £2000 at WEX without the EF/RF adapter, and although older, the R5(i) can be had for £2400 including adapter from HDEW (grey import, although I've bought a lot of stuff from them without any issues), or a used example from MBP for between £1800 and £2200.
SteveKTMer said:
I went from 5dII to R6 and I wish I'd moved to Sony.
The RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than the original L series EF lenses. Also most of the RF lenses are not as good as EF lenses, they rely on in camera manipulation. Without it the distortion is often terrible. Also Canon don't let any other company use the RF mount including the electronics, so there aren't any third party genuine RF lenses, although this might be about to change,
Sony has a much wider range of lenses, they are cheaper and the GM lenses are usually better than the similar RF L lenses.
If you've got a lot of EF L lenses you want to keep, then fair enough, might be cheaper to stay with Canon if you don't mind using the EF-RF adapter, but if not, I'd go with Sony.
Having said all that, the R6 and probably now the R6 II, is near perfect for an amateur. It's not as fluid to use as the 5dii or iii, some of the enjoyment is replaced by having to remember more buttons and menu info but I can get more keeper shots than before with eye detection and better stabilisation. But still, the best shots I've ever taken were with a 5dii.
Canon were late to the game, so they’ve been playing catch up. However… if someone can’t find a Canon lens suitable for their useage, they’re not looking hard enough. And many are bloody good value for amateurs. Or if you don’t like the RF lenses because they are too pricey, just pick up any EF lens made since 1987 and it’ll work a treat. The RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than the original L series EF lenses. Also most of the RF lenses are not as good as EF lenses, they rely on in camera manipulation. Without it the distortion is often terrible. Also Canon don't let any other company use the RF mount including the electronics, so there aren't any third party genuine RF lenses, although this might be about to change,
Sony has a much wider range of lenses, they are cheaper and the GM lenses are usually better than the similar RF L lenses.
If you've got a lot of EF L lenses you want to keep, then fair enough, might be cheaper to stay with Canon if you don't mind using the EF-RF adapter, but if not, I'd go with Sony.
Having said all that, the R6 and probably now the R6 II, is near perfect for an amateur. It's not as fluid to use as the 5dii or iii, some of the enjoyment is replaced by having to remember more buttons and menu info but I can get more keeper shots than before with eye detection and better stabilisation. But still, the best shots I've ever taken were with a 5dii.
Tony1963 said:
SteveKTMer said:
I went from 5dII to R6 and I wish I'd moved to Sony.
The RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than the original L series EF lenses. Also most of the RF lenses are not as good as EF lenses, they rely on in camera manipulation. Without it the distortion is often terrible. Also Canon don't let any other company use the RF mount including the electronics, so there aren't any third party genuine RF lenses, although this might be about to change,
Sony has a much wider range of lenses, they are cheaper and the GM lenses are usually better than the similar RF L lenses.
If you've got a lot of EF L lenses you want to keep, then fair enough, might be cheaper to stay with Canon if you don't mind using the EF-RF adapter, but if not, I'd go with Sony.
Having said all that, the R6 and probably now the R6 II, is near perfect for an amateur. It's not as fluid to use as the 5dii or iii, some of the enjoyment is replaced by having to remember more buttons and menu info but I can get more keeper shots than before with eye detection and better stabilisation. But still, the best shots I've ever taken were with a 5dii.
Canon were late to the game, so they’ve been playing catch up. However… if someone can’t find a Canon lens suitable for their useage, they’re not looking hard enough. And many are bloody good value for amateurs. Or if you don’t like the RF lenses because they are too pricey, just pick up any EF lens made since 1987 and it’ll work a treat. The RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than the original L series EF lenses. Also most of the RF lenses are not as good as EF lenses, they rely on in camera manipulation. Without it the distortion is often terrible. Also Canon don't let any other company use the RF mount including the electronics, so there aren't any third party genuine RF lenses, although this might be about to change,
Sony has a much wider range of lenses, they are cheaper and the GM lenses are usually better than the similar RF L lenses.
If you've got a lot of EF L lenses you want to keep, then fair enough, might be cheaper to stay with Canon if you don't mind using the EF-RF adapter, but if not, I'd go with Sony.
Having said all that, the R6 and probably now the R6 II, is near perfect for an amateur. It's not as fluid to use as the 5dii or iii, some of the enjoyment is replaced by having to remember more buttons and menu info but I can get more keeper shots than before with eye detection and better stabilisation. But still, the best shots I've ever taken were with a 5dii.
If you're going to buy an RF camera and not use RF lenses, you may as well buy another brand, like Sony.
SteveKTMer said:
The good RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than comparable Sony lenses and they still need in camera correction. If you're a pro and it's your business then the cost is not really a problem, but Sony have more lenses which cover the same applications and they are generally, much cheaper and just as good. I wasn't saying Canon don't have lenses, but buying an EF lens and using the adapter isn't ideal and you're not getting the full RF benefit.
If you're going to buy an RF camera and not use RF lenses, you may as well buy another brand, like Sony.
No. If you have EF fit lenses, like the fit and menu system of a Canon, then starting over again with a different brand might not be sensible. EF lenses tend to work very well via the adapter, and allow the cost of changing to fully RF to be gradual. If you're going to buy an RF camera and not use RF lenses, you may as well buy another brand, like Sony.
Tony1963 said:
SteveKTMer said:
The good RF lenses are very expensive, much more so than comparable Sony lenses and they still need in camera correction. If you're a pro and it's your business then the cost is not really a problem, but Sony have more lenses which cover the same applications and they are generally, much cheaper and just as good. I wasn't saying Canon don't have lenses, but buying an EF lens and using the adapter isn't ideal and you're not getting the full RF benefit.
If you're going to buy an RF camera and not use RF lenses, you may as well buy another brand, like Sony.
No. If you have EF fit lenses, like the fit and menu system of a Canon, then starting over again with a different brand might not be sensible. EF lenses tend to work very well via the adapter, and allow the cost of changing to fully RF to be gradual. If you're going to buy an RF camera and not use RF lenses, you may as well buy another brand, like Sony.
Genuine question here, regarding your comment I've highlighted in bold, why is using the adapter "not ideal", and what exactly is "the full RF benefit"?
As the adapter is just a tube which adjusts the distance from the lens to the sensor, it doesn't introduce any image quality issues, as there's no glass in it and if you buy a genuine Canon one, the fit is very secure.
About the only thing I could think of is possibly the slight additional weight of the adapter (110g), but this really doesn't matter to me, as even with the adapter permanently fitted to the R5, the body and adapter in total weigh 848g compared to the 5D3 at 950g.
I still regularly use the 5D3 in addition to the R5, especially for stuff where it's easier to use 2 bodies for different focal length lenses rather than mess about swapping lenses on the one body, and after several years of this, I really cannot see ANY downside to using the EF-RF adapter and continuing to use EF lenses.
SteveKTMer said:
If you're going to buy an RF camera and not use RF lenses, you may as well buy another brand, like Sony.
The idea of moving to an entirely different manufacturer, like Sony, or Nikon, or Fuji would be very much "not ideal", as instead of just fitting the adapter to the R5 body and then forgetting about it, I'd have to sell all my EF lenses, then have to buy their (for example) Sony replacements at considerable additional cost (I'd be lucky to get £600 for my perfectly serviceable 70-200 f2.8 IS, then need to spend £2k on the Sony replacement). It's not just the lenses either - there's the cost to replace other Canon accessories - remote releases, multiple speedlight flashguns (the Sony equivalents are £500 each) etc.. Oh, and then I can set about learning a whole new menu system and way of operating, rather than just carry on using the interface and lenses I'm familiar with after years of continuous experience.So, buying an RF camera and not using RF lenses very much DOES makes sense, as you can continue to use EF lenses without having to replace them all, you can continue to use a mix of DSLR and mirrorless bodies with those lenses, and all the other accessories continue to work, and if the mood takes you, you can also use those same EF lenses with a range of very good EOS film cameras as well.
C n C said:
The idea of moving to an entirely different manufacturer, like Sony, or Nikon, or Fuji would be very much "not ideal", as instead of just fitting the adapter to the R5 body and then forgetting about it, I'd have to sell all my EF lenses, then have to buy their (for example) Sony replacements at considerable additional cost (I'd be lucky to get £600 for my perfectly serviceable 70-200 f2.8 IS, then need to spend £2k on the Sony replacement). It's not just the lenses either - there's the cost to replace other Canon accessories - remote releases, multiple speedlight flashguns (the Sony equivalents are £500 each) etc.. Oh, and then I can set about learning a whole new menu system and way of operating, rather than just carry on using the interface and lenses I'm familiar with after years of continuous experience.
So, buying an RF camera and not using RF lenses very much DOES makes sense, as you can continue to use EF lenses without having to replace them all, you can continue to use a mix of DSLR and mirrorless bodies with those lenses, and all the other accessories continue to work, and if the mood takes you, you can also use those same EF lenses with a range of very good EOS film cameras as well.
Ditto, and you nicely went into detail with your reply that I just couldn’t be bothered with. So, buying an RF camera and not using RF lenses very much DOES makes sense, as you can continue to use EF lenses without having to replace them all, you can continue to use a mix of DSLR and mirrorless bodies with those lenses, and all the other accessories continue to work, and if the mood takes you, you can also use those same EF lenses with a range of very good EOS film cameras as well.
People like to extoll the virtues of Sony’s cameras, and I’ve no issue with that. But, every now and then I’ll see a review that points out a weird ‘feature’ and I’ll think “Naaa, I’ll stay where I am thanks”.
In the end, I’ll probably stick with Canon til I give up photography. After all, I’m only a keen amateur, so I’ve absolutely no need to ever consider chasing the latest and greatest. And I just don’t have enough money for that anyway.
Edited by Tony1963 on Sunday 5th January 19:02
Edited by Tony1963 on Sunday 5th January 19:42
thebraketester said:
I don’t want to start again with lenses so I’ll stick with the EF stuff I’ve got. Just need to decided between the r8 and R6ii now and whether to wait until the r6iii comes out. Will see.
If you’re ’happy enough’ at the moment with the 5D2 and moving onto mirrorless can wait, just keep waiting, keep using the 5D2. When and if the time is right, you’ll know. And the longer you can wait without issues, the ‘better’ the next camera will be. My 5D3 was carrying some issues, so it was time to let it go. I didn’t want the huge files from the R5, and just felt like being silly for once in my camera buying life. 24mp is enough for almost everything, and I just love the speed of the AF in the R3.
Anyway. Bed.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff