I need help changing my camera: what makes sense?

Hardware
1

Hey guys,

I’m currently dealing with one topic in particular. I’ve been shooting with Canon for the last 13 years. It all started with a second-hand EOS 40D and an 18-135mm lens. Step by step, very slowly, I expanded the system and eventually switched to the 7D Mark II. And because I wanted to try out full format, I then bought the 6D Mark II. I have the following lenses:

Canon 16-35mm f/4 L
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II L
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Macro
Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8
Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-5.6

I sold the 40D at some point - so now I still have the 7D M2 and the 6D M2. The image quality of the 6D could be better in terms of dynamic range, the ISO noise also bothers me with this model - focus could also be better. I only use the 7D as a backup in case something goes wrong with the 6D. I do a lot of macro photography and occasionally some landscape. I want to start photographing wildlife, as we have a lot of ibex, chamois and bearded vultures here. Now I’m at a point where I’m wondering whether I should continue to invest in lenses and accessories for DSLRs, or whether I should switch to mirrorless cameras. As an upgrade for a 6D Mark II, there is only the 5D Mark IV from Canon’s DSLR range to choose from, but that probably makes absolutely no sense at the moment?

Mirrorless would then be the R5 or the R5 Mark II from Cannon - although the Mark II is far too expensive for me.

My decision is made more difficult by the fact that I really like the Nikon Z8. The Z8 is also in an interesting price range. In terms of handling, the arrangement of the controls and the internal functions (autofocus), it actually seems to be quite a good camera. It seems to me that Nikon is just a bit more adapted to the needs of nature photographers - Canon a bit more for journalism / sports. And just because I decided to buy a cheap, second-hand Canon 13 or 14 years ago, it doesn’t seem to me to be the right approach to make this decision.

However, if I were to change brands completely, it would be quite expensive. The macro lens, 105mm, is important to me. An all-round 24-75 or 24-105mm should also be included. And some telephoto; 180-600 would also be desirable. I would set my budget for the body at max. 2,800.00. I can then buy lenses one after the other, as the salary account and my financial administration approve…

I’m an ambitious hobby photographer, so I’m not a professional and as a father and full-time employee I probably don’t have enough time to become a professional. But you can buy tools that are fun to work with and don’t limit your workflow or the result of your pictures.

How would you make such a decision; what tips can you give me - I am grateful for any input. Is it even worth switching from one brand to another, or are these all just marketing benchmarks that are not noticeable in the everyday life of a photographer? The decision doesn’t have to be made today or tomorrow; the important thing is that I can weigh up the pros and cons and not regret the purchase later. It should be worth it in the long term.

As you can see, questions and questions. But that’s what a forum like this is for :smiley:

1 Like
2

Take a look at the R6 Mark II, unless you need the R5’s high resolution.

3

Roughly four years ago I migrated from Canon DSLR to mirror-less. As you can adapt all your lenses to the RF system the transition is quite smooth. Meanwhile, I have transitioned, step by step, to RF lenses. For macro and landscape photography, when no fast auto-focus is required, adaptation of lenses is no problem at all.

1 Like
4

The 24MP resolution of the 6D Mark II has never bothered me and is actually good enough for my purposes.

I hadn’t considered the R6 Mark II until now. When I decided on the 6D Mark II back then, when I switched to full format, I wanted to make a good compromise between price/performance, which is why I decided against the 5D Mark IV. Today I regret the decision, because the 6D Mark II doesn’t have the dynamic range and noise floor of a professional camera, which regularly disturbs me in my pictures and my way of taking pictures.

I don’t want to make this “mistake” again. As I said, the dynamic range, the background noise and the autofocus are important to me when making the switch. Can I assume that the R6 Mark II is a worthwhile upgrade from the 6D Mark II?

I have heard this very point several times now and have also thought about it myself. Because this way I don’t have to change all my lenses straight away and can continue to use the lenses with the adapter ring. Financially, the complete switch from Canon to Nikon definitely speaks against it.

5

Never went full-frame and upgraded to a R7. It appears that the Sigma lenses don’t play that well with the every fast AF of the R7 (it works but the behavior is a bit wild at times), while things are somewhat smoother with Canon lenses (I assume the R7 firmware recognizes them…). On the other hand there is a Canon RF 100-400mm that is not very expensive and the camera AF will still works if you add a 1.4x TC.

6

Yes, I think this is the case. Here are the DXOMark dynamic range measurments (the R6 Mark II features the same sensor as the R8):

6D Mark II - 11,9
Z8 - 14,2
R5 - 14,6
R8 - 14,7

1 Like
7

I don’t know the Canon lineup well, but Nikon at least had a last best DSLR, the D850, which is still very much competitive with mirrorless bodies in terms of AF speed and image quality. Does Canon have something similar?

If not, frankly, I’d take a long hard look at the other current mirrorless brands. I know several photographers who migrated from DSLRs to mirrorless, and none of them have ultimately kept their DSLR lenses. So, if you’re going to swap them out eventually anyway, you might as well do it now, and cut your tether to Canon. (Besides, there are good adapters for Canon DSLR lenses for all current mirrorless brands).

What exactly do you want to achieve with the switch to mirrorless? Nikon is probably the best-optimzed system for wildlife, but generally large and heavy. Sony is less optimized, but will probably save you quite a bit of weight and size. Olympus is even smaller, but comes with more compromises… You can probably make any other brand work as well, depending on your needs. Canon is (currently?) really held back by their refusal to work with Tamron and Sigma.

TL;DR either stay DSLR, or switch brands. A slow migration is probably unnecessarily painful—even if you decide to go with Canon mirrorless.

2 Likes
8

The D850’s image quality is comparable to the best of the modern DSLM cameras. Canon did not do quite so well in that time period.

9

Because of the lenses you all ready own I would only consider sticking with Canon. Buy the mirrorless body that suits your needs and budget and you will find the adapter for EF to RF lens mount works flawlessly. Of course there may be a D-SLR Canon that suits your needs and then an adapter would not be required. It would seem a very expensive exercise to switch from Canon to another manufacturer when you own all those lenses.

1 Like
10

The R6 series has a reputation of excellent low light handling.

11

I’d say you need to set a budget first. That will determine a lot of things. Are you trying to get to mirrorless for a cheap as possible? Do you want to change some lenses?

You probably won’t get amazing resale on your EF lenses at this point.

If you’re trying to go as cheap as possible and want to stay at 24mpix → just get the canon body plus an adapter. Upgrade lenses over time, as you need (or not at all).

If you have more budget and want to jump systems, then there is a lot more to consider.

I have been in the nikon system for almost a decade and I really like it. Now they’re moving pretty slow with Z series bodies, which I think makes it time to grab a good body. The z8 looks awesome and will work well for wildlife. There are a number of first and third party lenses to choose from on the Nikon.

1 Like
12

He actually did, for the body:

But in order for anyone to make suitable advice, it would be helpful to know what country the OP lives in and what country’s currency he is referring to.

13

I live in Switzerland; Swiss Francs. So, lets say my uppermost limit would be 3’000.- for the Body. The Z8 is available for around 2’900.- now.

I quite like the bigger bodies, because I have big hands. I also find it easier to hold the camera steady when it has some weight with it. It should also be robust, as I’m always out and about in nature.

Yes, I’ve also seen the D850. It also performs very well on Sensors Database - DXOMARK - still does. But staying with the DSLR system and changing manufacturers doesn’t make sense in my opinion…

I will see if I can rent the R6 Mark II and the R5. That way I can try out how they both behave and feel in my hands. I can also look at the pictures I’ve taken with them on the screen at my leisure and see if I like the quality of the pictures when pixel peeping.

I will also be renting a Nikon Z8 for this purpose, so I can compare the systems. Sony and Olympus are rather too small for me, from what I’ve seen so far. I like having a camera in my hand and taking the time to take my pictures. I’m not the kind of action photographer who simply carries a small compact in my rucksack.

I’ve seen that too. I just wonder what target group Canon has in mind with this camera. I have the impression that it is aimed more at action and vlogging. I’ve also read some articles that describe that the image quality is better due to the higher number of pixels in the R5.

As I said, I will probably have to test the cameras so that I can get a realistic picture for myself.

14

I don’t have one so I can’t make a recommendation for you, but I know a number of people who shoot wildlife with the R6 and they’re pretty happy with it.

My R7 had focus pulsing issues with the Sigma 150-600. I don’t know if the same issue occurs with the R6 II, so you might want to do some research

Also, Flicker is a pretty good resource to see how your potential camera combo has been used by others