Hands-on with the Canon EOS R6

Do you guys think that human hand form has radically changed too? Wow!!. Canon SLR's are consistently best in terms of ergonomics. Unless the World is populated by different species known to you only there is no need for a radical change in the form factor.

blackcoffee17

Why does it have to be either or?

The lowend EOS-M gets viewfinder and viewfinder-less models. Even the option for a removable viewfinder for the best of all worlds.

Why should the premium EOS-R have fewer choices and fewer options?

seloo

It's like they are using the same body. You would think there would be some advantage to going mirrorless but as it is the R looks just as chunky as and exactly like any old DSLR.

No doubt, I just dunno whether A) there's a market for it (tho I'm very much part of that side od the market that wants to see more portable options) and B) whether Canon read really wants to support two mounts... It'd be an interesting course correction from what they've done historically if it pans out, I'm all for it, just skeptical.

I for one would go for a full frame in Sony A6*** body size for sure. If Canon made it, pair it with the 28-70 f2.0 for a comical looking beast of an outfit. :)

I am using Fuji for a while and waited a long time to finally say goodbye to Fuji. Canon for sure took a while. From my personal perspective getting rid of xtrans alone is worth a bunch of money. Replacing Fuji AF is the other big deal for me. Getting back to Canon colors and ergonomics is not a small feature for some people as well. I worked 15 years with 5D cameras and alike and no other camera reached that level of ergonomics and plain fun to use them. Just try the three wheels once, and you know that there is not just a small difference.

It is not that I dislike Fuji. They are doing well and they do something different. I would love if Canon would come up with a camera similar to the Pro 2. But I had enough of the quirky ways of xtrans and AF with my Fuji’s. It is time to return home. ;-)

because most people don’t want a fuji or apsc, especially when already a Canon shooter... what’s not to understand?

Actually, I would love a just as powerful and full featured R7 APSC camera with RF mount APSC sized lenses. I want less expensive and lighter lenses at the same quality level, but for an APSC sized sensor. Maybe I’m the only person who wants this. If this appeals to you, lets send a message to Canon by giving it a like. Thanks. BTW Canon just use the R6 body, no need to change it. Sensor from the M6 Mk II with improved detail filter like R6. No crippled wimps please. If anything, IBIS and battery life would improve!

meanwhile Fuji users are shooting great 4K video, since the T2, while you are stuck with fake 4K video, upscaled from 1080p, that is what Canon offers ;) I'm shooting great 4K video, since I move to PAnasonic, and Samsung, since 2014 ehee

All interesting points, but I’ve tried to like using Fujis, except the XT-4 and XH1, but I don’t like how they feel in my hands. Don’t know why, just don’t. The Canon Rs fit my hands perfectly. And the R6 looks promising.

Yeah, I don't understand why the power switch isn't around the shutter button. With this, you can't just bring the camera up to your eye and turn it on in one smooth motion. You have to take one of your hands off of the camera/lens first. The menu button being on the left side would make sense for a DSLR, where you have to take it from your eye to see the menu anyway. On a camera with an EVF, it's a pain (like I mentioned with the A77ii)

The 1Dx Mkiii has a DR of 14.5 stops. Excellent.

Underrated feature, and makes it more practical than the R5. 1/30 readout speed sucks, 1/60 is very usable. Hopefully this can be vetted.

I believe a lot of the Sony cameras (at least the prior generation) also drop down to 12-bit for their top shutter speed, and nobody has complained about it. Should be fine. (I believe my a6500 does, but it's never been an issue)

How do you say that? Internet content creators? For most, the right term would be more like: INTERNET VOID CREATORS.

I dont know if you are replying to me @tourlou, im a sports photographer and im doing really high-volume of work.

Is NO ONE going to ask about OP's use of "megapickels"? Lol. I mean...once, it's a typo. Three times, and ... does he think this camera has something to do with giant cucumbers?

He's versed in gardening too.

@Reactive I hasn't seen anything about pixel-shift on either the R5 or R6.

@Matt Swanson Megapickels are just better. 🥒🥒🥒

@Tourlou My lawn, and flower bed would like to say otherwise.

I read it has focus stacking

Although I do have a 44" printer which clearly needs as many pixels as you can feed it, I shoot way too fast and too many images of models. Very few will ever be used. I currently use my trusty 5DMKIII with >350K actuations and 22 MPX is fine for this. The new R6 is a better sensor, combined with all the other features a good choice for fashion, models, events etc. Glad to see 2 options, and both are capable. Just waiting on serious DR testing. That is where Nikon/Sony make a huge difference for what I do.

Because they keep beating us at cricket, rugby, hockey......well everything and its VERY annoying - hence high prices........🤪

No they won’t. I think £6.50 is a fair price guv.

Lmao no. Literally no one would be complaining.

I wondered too, and decided the sensor is also read at the faster speed is why...processing and moving a lot of data. Just displaying the scene on EVF or LCD is almost as much work as recording a video I surmise.

It shouldn't be surprising TBH, this has happened with a lot of other mirrorless bodies in the past, the gap between EVF and rear display power consumption has widened more lately, but it's been there for a while... EVF keep advancing whereas they aren't really improving the rear LCDs all that much. Higher res and higher refresh rate has always meant more power consumption regardless of display size.

I believe the A7iii sells for 2000USD and the R6 is 2500USD, so a $500 difference. That variance in cost is not enough to influence a buyers decision. A camera is part of a system and the other necessary parts will cost you a lot more than the camera body itself.

VinnySem - Most buyers of the Sony will probably be existing Sony users, and most buyers of the Canon will be existing Canon users.

As a broad generalisation, Sony buyers seem to be primarily interested in specifications. They want the latest tech, the best sensor etc, and are happy to live with mediocre ergonomics.

Canon users, again generalising, tend to be far more interested in usability. They don't care so much about having the very best specification, they care more about whether the camera is easy and pleasurable to operate.

I don't think the difference in price will affect buying decisions very much.

"The only advantage these new Canon's have is their fully articulating touch screen."

Now that's funny.

Generally speaking, cameras are always price sensitive. If there's a significant difference between two models, the buyer will want to be convinced that the more expensive model is THE one for them. Particularly applies to people moving into FF for the first time, where brand loyalty is less of an issue.

As someone who's totally impartial (I shoot M4/3) but who *is* looking to jump into the FF market, I can tell you +/- $500 on the body would be pretty inconsequential to me... I'm gonna spend at least 3x that on lenses soon after I buy the body anyway.

Oh and the standout feature on the Canons for me wouldn't be the fully articulated display (although I do prefer that on my "larger" body), tilt vs FAS is a pretty subjective and polarizing personal preference thing. The standout Canon feature would easily be the IBIS, after being last to the party they seem to have knocked that out of the park.

Even if real world results "only" amount to 5-6 stops, that would still be class leading and something pretty much only Olympus (and Panasonic to an extent) has managed AFAIK, easily 2-4 stops better than Sony's or even Nikon's IBIS depending on lens and FL. It'll be interesting to see how that breaks down by lens...

The R6 also has an EVF that's nicer than the A7III's, I'm not particularly sold on either but anyone cross shopping them would likely look at that. The existing lens catalog for Sony (including 3rd party stuff from Samyang, Tamron, Laowa, etc) is definitely a big selling point for me.

The primary reason why I'd get an R5 or R6 would be for IBIS which would allow me to more easily handhold my unstabilised by superb 180mm F3.5 macro, without having to settle for Sony ergonomics or the weight of a Panasonic S1R.

But the Sony a7Riv provides strong competition, as it has a tilting screen rather than fully articulated, and has much better battery life.

It's a far from straightforward choice.

I cannot handle Sony and Nikon mirrorless, because they squeeze my fingers in a bad way. I worked with a 5D for 15 years and love the ergonomics. There is no way that the price(difference) plays any role in my buying decision. Add to this that Canon comes around with an uncrippled user interface for a price below what they asked for in the 5D segment for years, and I will not complain.

@entoman

//As a broad generalisation, Sony buyers seem to be primarily interested in specifications.//

You may believe this, but there is no evidence to back it up. If I look at the profile pages of Canon users I can see that many users have large amounts of L-lenses but are self-proclaimed amateurs. You might easily say that Canon users are primarily interested in high spec lenses, but in truth it isn't worth making this generalisation.

//They want the latest tech, the best sensor etc, and are happy to live with mediocre ergonomics.//

Sorry, this is simply an ignorant and partisan comment. Sony users bought their gear for exactly there same reasons Canon users bought their gear. Sony cameras don't have 'mediocre ergonomics'. I know that you believe they do, but that doesn't make it a fact. As I have commented too many times on here, to you and others, as someone who has professional expertise in prototyping and design

RubberDials - I don't really want to get into another Sony vs Canon debate, but briefly:

The comments that have appeared here for the last few years definitely suggest that a lot of Sony users place specification above all else. That's how it comes across to me.

Ergonomics - I absolutely understand and agree with the definition of ergonomics that you quote. Almost every review citicises Sony ergonomics. Many, many posts on dpr - including those from many past or present Sony users, criticise Sony ergonomics. Personally I think they are vastly inferior (with the exception of the excellent a7Riv EVF) to Canon, Nikon or Panasonic ergonomics.

The most frequent reasons given by Canon users for using the brand, are ergonomics, lenses and reliability.

I understand that *some* Sony users are in love with their cameras, but there are plenty who are not, and there are several who are ridiculously defensive and incapable of admitting that the cameras are anything less than perfect.

continued....

But would I buy a Sony?

Well, that's another matter. I *might* be willing to use a camera that has superior performance and specifications, and be willing to put up with second-rate ergonomics. But from what I can see so far, the R5 would be better for my purposes (although I do prefer the tilting screen of the Sony).

Contd.

An example of a highly popular device with extremely poor ergonomic design is the mobile phone. It is difficult to hold, has extremely poor discoverability of function, often has poor repeatability of function due to the limits of touch screens, has weak recovery from error (the iPhone has no back or return button) and mostly has weak or non-existent user feedback (it's not clear whether the action you've performed has taken place). Despite these immense ergonomic drawbacks almost no-one complains about it - why? Answer that question and you'll know why you don't moan to me about Canon's poor ergonomics and I don't moan to you about Sony's.

RubberDials - Well I don't think we'll ever agree about the "merits" or otherwise of Sony ergonomics, so we'll just have to accept that we differ in our views.

As for mobile phones, I think they are (for photography) an ergonomic disaster. You have I'm sure deduced long ago that I place ergonomics, user-friendliness and usability higher on my priority list than specification or performance.

At the end of the day, it comes down to whether or not I'm enjoying the experience of using the camera. I enjoy the experience of using Canons and Nikons, but that is not the case with Sony or Fujifilm cameras.

For you, the reverse seems to be the case, which is fine, I hope you enjoy using the product of your choice, and I wish the same to all photographers regardless of what gear they use.

I'll end my part in the discussion here.

RubberDials... you have brought up the 2 hands are worse than one when it comes to ergonomics on Canon cameras several times. I have been shooting for over 3 decades now. I always hold my cameras with 2 hands (except my very small "point and shoot" Ricoh GRIII). 2 hands is the "proper" way to hold a camera.

Your "arguments" that one should be able to change all settings and take photos with only one hand is really a red herring. Who shoots a full frame camera (mirrorless or dslr) with only one hand? What is your other hand doing? Typing at length a DPR "critique" of what is "wrong" with Canon...and "better" with Sony?

Speaking of typing (sharing often and at length), your "superior knowledge" in all things ergonomic... U must type on your keyboard with only one hand. Do you ever use both at the same time? Surely you would agree that keyboards would be "more" ergonomic if they had many more keys/options, an extremely non-intuitive menu, cramped your fingers & had mushy tiny keys!

Maybe recession, but also democracy, at least somewhere around the globe, or somebody particularly forces you to buy that product under the threat? As far, as I know, Canon continue to sell original R, and also even cheaper RP.

@underxposed59
You are correct. Once Canon finds out the camera is not selling, they will need to reduce the price to less than $2k within 6 months, or less. It's not as if cameras are flying of the shelves. Besides, it's not as if people have lenses to support it, or the lens ecosystem has what people want and/or need.

Within 4 to 6 months, the Sony A7 IV should be here, and most likely will be cheaper and may have improved features. Canon needs to drop the price of this R6 quickly before then.

Price is only one consideration when buying an expensive item like a camera. You’ll come to a decision which system you want to go with and a little money one way or the other won’t stand in your way. The camera is just the beginning of the money you’ll be spending, you’re going to need some lenses too. The Sony A7iii is $2000USD and the R6 at launch is $2500USD. The $500 difference is irrelevant.

You guys realize Sony is about to launch a $3000-3500 a7sII that has nowhere to go now right? It can't go above the R5 in specs, it can't go below the R6 in price. People have been waiting for 5 years and Canon is leading out with 4k60 10 bit 4:2:2 from a practically full sensor. A sensor taken from a $6500 camera which is probably excellent for action/sports/nature photography. With dual pixel AF maybe they're more an a9 competitor than a7 or at least sufficiently in between to justify the price tag. Guess we'll have to wait for the review.

They were developing this product way before the pandemic. The option would be not to release it?

Of course they will release it. And it's not like people with a lot of glass will jump back and forth, so good for those on E-mount. But calling this camera dead on arrival for being priced at $2500 is well... silly. For example I'd probably pick this over a Panasonic S1H.

I simply find it is possible to get Sony involved in any topic. "This is more expensive than Sony", "This is worse in specs than Sony", "This has less choice than Sony". We really need to enforce the law to make Sony the only metric system。

I don't see what the big deal is or why world economics matter (not diminishing the very serious issues that are going on mind you), it's got a better EVF and seemingly vastly better IBIS than the A7 III, that alone will be worth the extra $500 to some. If it sells poorly or the A7 IV overshadows it significantly then Canon can react, but I dunno why they would undervalue their stuff from the get go.

Things are tough (downright horrible for many), I get it, and I'm the last person to make excuses for Canon (I've actually been seriously looking at E mount)... But the pricing just doesn't seem that outrageous to me, and it's not like prices are ever gonna trend down in a shrinking market, better get used to it (sadly).

It's standard practice for Canon to launch cameras at inflated prices, and it's good marketing sense. There'll be plenty of early adopters desperate to have the latest model, and prepared to pay over the odds to get it.

When Canon has milked that market, they'll drop the price to a realistic level for the rest of us. Canon know more about marketing than anyone else in the business, and that's why they are number one.

It always pays to wait until a camera has been on the market for a few months. Then you not only get a cheaper camera, you also get one in which any early firmware bugs will have been fixed.

Why do the Sony users not simply go away? To me any Sony camera is dead on arrival, because they hurt my fingers and my brain. Do I go to the Sony forum and complain? I couldn’t care less about the differences between brands. A Sony is simply unusable for me. The new Canons are pretty full featured with ergonomics I love and more power than I ever need. I prefer to look forward and not sideways.

For the record I own 4 Canon cameras and have almost always prefered Canon.

For me the R6 is DOA due to price and the fact it doesn’t offer me anything justifing the high cost

@KEG You have a point about recession. First Canon made high investment in R&D for a new sensor to record 8K for video for R5 and did some fix on the sensor for R6. Second every camera in this segment of the market will be introduced at $2500. Third the market is much smaller then 10 years ago and less camera will be sold resulting in an increase in the cost per unit.

Due to a high supply of camera's in this segment of the market you will see that in 6 months the price will drop under $2000. Sony has allready amortizes a big part of their key mirrorless technnogy.

@keg - Right... I'd still buy the Canon than what Sony has to offer at a reduced price.

I admit, it's a bit pricey, but man we get the 1DX Mark III sensor with the same specs in here... if this cam would have a shoulder display I would *REALLY* concern it. The sensor is face to face with the A9 II... a few weeks after releasing the flagship for double the price.

You should learn to troll better

Who do you mean?

It's really too expensive, even when the AF is being great. But compare seriously the EOS-RP with the EOS R6 - the Body looks basically from Top Plate not better, like the Nikon Z50.

For Canon, the EOS R6 seems like a "beginners" Fullframe DSLM, but into Europe, it's a hell lot expensive, for 2700 EUR, one can get a used M9, and a excellent Zeiss Biogon 35/F2 ZM. Yes, not comparable, into any Way, but i'd consider strongly that Combo as serious Tool, vs. a R6, with 24-105 STM or L Zoom.

Seriously, one wouldn't spent 2700 EUR, which is awful much Money for a FF DSLM, and a way cheap Lens from IQ, like the 24-105 RF STM, see Christopher Frost Review:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx9fDx77vgg

Sorry to crash the Party, but that Zoom is not being extraordinary.

Good Night.

There is nothing wrong about being expensive, as long as it offers compelling reason to pay for it. In R6's case, it is a great camera with all features wanted and a 1dx3 heart, which is compelling enough.

It looks to be priced too expensive in Europe. I think it should come down but 3-400 Euros.
Otherwise Z6 is almost a perfect camera for me.

r6 has the 1dx iii sensor, BUT
* with a much inferior AA filter stack (cripple hammer)
and
* 20 MP may be fine for sports coverage/jpgs for immediate publication - which 1DX iii is mainly used for

but for general photography i certainly will not buy an expensive FF camera with a re-used mirrorslapper sensor with only 20 MP resolution in 2020.

i want a pure stills camera with 45+ MP at an affordable price (1999,- € or less. until they offer such a thing, Canon can kiss my rebel *ss.

Xeppelin, I think you are trolling Canon now. P

...that's what she said.

20mp should be enough for almost anyone.

Xeppelin, just to be clear, why do you think you need more than 20 MPix?

Are you a professional photographer doing portraiture or landscapes?

Do you want to do pixel peeping magnifying the pics like crazy on a 5K screen?

Do you do extreme cropping because you are incompetent at framing?

Do you want to just brag?

I am happy it does not have 32 or 45MP. I want a FF camera, I want IBIS, I want to use my Canon glass. I want to print the pics at a reasonable size (no A2 billboards!). Anything more than 20MPix would be too much for me, a waste of storage and processing power.

i never print. not big, not small. no free wall space. and i prefer to view photographs translucent/illuminated = on displays.

in a *new FF* camera in 2020 i want 45+ MP to be sure my images will natively fill 8k displays and screens which will be standard pretty soon now. plus 10% cropping reserve. as amateur i usually don't get privileged access and cannot get as close to the action as i would like to.

when 20 MP are good enough, i use my cheap, small & light EOS M (1st gen) with its ancient 18 MP sensor.

and i don't brag at all. i'm a hobbyist and i want to make sure when i spend money i get max bang for the buck and if i lug around FF gear i want my raw files to be somewhat future proof.

storage is reasonably cheap these days and my 4 yr. old PC will handle 45 MP images, not worried there. i only do stills, no video.

8k display won't get standard, soon. I still have Full HD and I'm pretty satisfied (if the stream has true 1080i). I could understand 4k, so 8k has the advantage to show 4k in 3D.... ;)

Is that how you define "soon"? Almost a year and a half away?

I needs racing stripes, a giant rear spoiler, chrome rims, and glass tint -- like a proper-looking camera should have.

What to expect from a Fuji and an Olympusguy? Hard times now... ;)

At least it doesn't have the lame retro-hipster look.

I do like the R and R5 top plate. How about that vscd.

I think the same. I miss the shoulderdisplay on the r6. But I liked the design. It's like coming home for a 5D user.

As opposed to the pseudo-retro throw back anti-ergonomic look of Fujifilm cameras?

Which is in what way different from designing a camera which no-one will buy?

Smartphone processor/RAM/screen/sensor development & manufacturer cost is huge. But, still sell in cheap price e.g. IPhone SE 2020 only USD 399 & Huawei P30

They won't make a 30mp (or 32mp like the EOS90D) because if they did the reasons to go for the 45mp higher spec model are far less unless you are really into video which many are not.

I sort of don't care because I am a Nikon shooter and am waiting patiently for them to introduce a mirror-less camera that can keep up with this. No, the Nikon Z6 (or the Sony A7III) are not comparable. For someone that shoots wildlife and fast moving dogs, the AF and speed blow the competition out of the water. The Z6, even with the latest firmware, is not good for action. The Sony is better but then you have to deal with their ergonomics and relatively lame viewfinder. Neither is as fast, especially with the mechanical shutter. Gotta give Canon credit here, they are ahead of the competition and, depending on what you are photographing, easily worth the extra premium. If this were a Nikon with similar specs, it would already be pre-ordered.

Plus with Sony you get that sweet Tamron glass. 17-28/2.8 plus 28-75/2.8 for the price a 24-70/2.8 costs alone at Canikon.

3rd party glass will continue to be a big selling factor for the few people that aren't upgrading from the same existing mount or from same-brand DSLRs... As an outsider looking objectively at E mount, literally half the glass I'd be interested in comes from 3rd parties (all w/AF, Tamron zooms, Samyang primes, etc.).

It'll be interesting to see how quickly CaNikon bridge that gap, so far I'm more interested in Nikon's stuff but that's merely because I'm attracted to wides and those collapsible zooms... Canon started from the top with their lens lineup but those new budget tele primes might draw in a lot of casual photogs.

Look Class A, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over.

@Barney Britton
I used the 5.7M-dot viewfinder from the Panasonic S1R and still see enormous differences to an OVF. Again, I accept that some people don't care, or even prefer an EVF experience but it isn't justifiable to suggest that a "gap" has been closed regardless of user priority.

The "IBIS comment" refers to the fact the DPReview is not consistent in evaluating certain features. Sometimes the very same feature is nothing to write home about or makes a real difference.

I agree, EVF still are pretty horrid to stare at. Jerky, laggy, LCDish.

They are much, much better than they were. Buts that all. Objectively and subjectively you can not claim that they are at least as immersive.

Still not anything like an OVF, especially moving objects.

The benefits of IBIS (which I love btw) aren't necessarily consistent so I can see why the way it's touted would seem inconsistent depending on context and who's writing... Canon IBIS also seems like a big step forward for FF IBIS. Still, people not shooting video or not shooting static low light scenes will continue looking at IBIS and shrug... It'll always matter more for some usage cases and not at all for others.

@Badison
"personal and subjective thing"

Exactly. That's why it isn't justifiable to claim a "gap" has been closed without further qualification, i.e. it is not justifiable to imply that there is no need for OVFs anymore.

Yes its personal but there are objective points which is what I had issue with.

They are not smooth like real life, they are not natural looking, they jerk, freeze, skip, lag, and blur.

Whether you dont mind those facts of an EVF is subjective and personal. Reviewers need to be more careful than the rest of us.

Hi Badison, I have used an R and an a7III.

The freezing, blur, and stuttering is a highly negative experience for me.

An OVF is completely natural in every facet of motion. There is just the short black insertion which is also very natural since it is essentially like our eyes blinking, a black frame.

Every EVF is how i state. Some are better than others is all. None are remotely near an OVF for motion handling.

If a person doesnt mind the downsides of an EVF, then its all good for them.

I like WYSIWYG so I like EVFs.

OVF fans, now is the time buy the best OVF model you can. The end isn’t far off.

@ZV-1
You don't seem to be using flash/strobes.

Unless one uses continuous lighting (energy hungry and either hot or compromised regarding colour fidelity), the WYSIWYG game of EVFs isn't that strong, is it?

I'm not worried about OVFs becoming unavailable but you are right that most self-taught reviewers are doing their best to marginalise them.

@Class A - how exactly OVF will help you with flash usage?
Or maybe you are shooting very fast movement with flash freeze?

Ok, so I went back and played with my Nikon N8008 film SLR OVF compared to the Z7. I don’t shoot super fast panning action shots, so WYSIWYG is a huge benefit for me over OVF, especially at night, especially with wide open lenses. However, I totally get some of the differences there are real. I will say that once I went EVF, I haven’t turned back. But, I absolutely agree there are disconnects compared to natural optical viewfinders.

20 MP is underwhelming compared with my 11 year old 5Dii

Its the same as your 5Dm2. But 12fps and 4 stops better noise/DR.

Nice big pixels. Lots enough pixels if you dont crop.

Infinitely nicer photos than from an M3. Why not claim that 20mp is underwhelming compared to your phone also?

Because I can upgrade to M6 mk II which has 32 MP and 14 fps without replacing everything.

32mp of tiny, less quality pixels yes.

My 5Dm2 makes nicer photos than my 7Dm2.

Pixel quality counts.

I agree we cant crop much at 20mp FF though.

Also I have to take into account the cost of going RF, I think it is around $10k - 15k.

@RvEL

The 1DX III has a slightly worse sensor than the A7 III. But that's fine the difference isn't huge.

Yeah - thanks panther fan - DR and megapixels are slightly lower on the Canon sensor. I think the difference will be negligible though.

The processor in the Canon is better, but raw for raw, I don't think there'll be enough difference to matter.

I would add in ergonomics and interfaces in the R6 camp. Neither are a technical limitation that can't be overcome but coming from a DSLR you can feel how the A7III was designed with usability playing second fiddle to space efficiency (going by the A7RIV this will probably be resolved somewhat by the A7IV but that's besides the point) and while you can put your essential functions in a custom menu, God help you if you need to find something in the main menu while in the field, there is no logic to the placement of options.

Don't get me wrong, this is written by a satisfied Sony user and is nothing compared to true limitations like not having a joy stick or only having one card slot but it's something to think about.

Lens selection ?
Canon has far more lenses than Sony. Many forget that the R series cameras also mount EF lenses without limitation.

mermaider - I've heard mixed things about adapting EF lenses, which is why I give Sony the lens selection tip of the hat.

Additionally, there are many well-developed adapters to use EF glass on Sony. So any glass that can be adapted to RF can be adapted to E (as far as I've seen). Then there's all the native Sony glass, most of which is pretty nice (here's looking at you, 55 and 85).

" I've heard mixed things about adapting EF lenses,"

Really? They work exactly is native on the R bodies. Where have you "heard" differently?

I know, I'm waiting for the Ferrari I want to drop to $20,000 new... why's it taking so long? ;-)

Is that a joke? Camera's routinely lose value due to deprecation. We all know MSRP is just a number calculated to maximize profit. I'm guessing the retail price right now is no where near the actual costs plus a reasonable margin. They'll first milk as many early adopters, before dropping prices.

EOS R dropped from $2299 to $1799 in about 18 months. I would expect R6 to be around $2000 in a similar window. There's a lot of competition in FF mirrorless. Rumors of Nikon Z6 refresh are already appearing.

For $1500, you might have to wait for the R6 II launch or a refurb holiday sale.

It always makes me smile when people complain that we've created too much content.

There is a big difference between QUALITY content about many products, and filling the front page with many articles about just two products.....

We have 3 articles about the R5 and 3 articles about the R6, posted on the same day. This content could easily have been consolidated. At least the "hands on" and "early review"..

@Barney Britton
The complaint was not about too much "content".

I had long ago set the money aside for the R5, read the specs today and preordered...
Then a couple hours later after reading more about the R6, I cancelled the R5 preorder and preordered the 6. Bummed there's no top panel like my R or 5DIV, but I do a lot of low-light photography and not really any video, so it turns out the R5 just seems like overkill.

"We have 3 articles about the R5 and 3 articles about the R6, posted on the same day. This content could easily have been consolidated."

It could have been, but why should it have been? The hands-on pieces are more accessible, and put the key information in an easily-digestible form, and tend to generate a lot of traffic. The longer, more in-depth 'initial reviews' will go on to form the basis for our full reviews, later.

We're not charging you for any of this - if you really don't want to read multiple articles, then don't - we won't be offended :)

Barney, just incase of a misunderstanding, I was not complaining. Thanks for all the articles. Last night, going to bed, I was telling my gf i can't wait to read and watch videos on the all the new Canon gear. I was planning to put off all my other plans today in order to absorb all the news. I was delighted to wake up to see so many articles! I honestly don't know which of them to read first. Thanks DPR for all your articles! Much appreciated! :)

You're very welcome! That's good to hear. The entire DPR team worked hard on these articles, I'm glad they're useful :)