Get R now, wait, pass, or switch?

Great Bustard wrote:

Ed Rizk wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Ed Rizk wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Ed Rizk wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

No, it won't make that much of a difference -- less than the difference between the 5D and 6D2. What would make a difference is the Z7, but due to the number of EF lenses I have (and the cost of the Z7), I'm kinda loathe to switch systems. The Z6 is a lot cheaper, of course, but I feel the MP count of the Z7 puts me at the point I'd never want for more, even when 100 MP cameras come out.

To be perfectly honest, if the R had the same sensor as the K1 (along with its IBIS and pixel-shift image stacking), that would do it for me. At that point, I will have reached the "good enough" point to where I'd never really "need" any more.

Those are all cool features. I wonder about the trade offs. I guess you give up RAW files with any kind of in camera image stacking.

Oh shoot -- no, I want that pixel-shift image stacking to be in the RAW file. The K1 does that with RAW, doesn't it?

I have no idea.   Stacking on some cameras put out JPEGs only.   If you can use the stacking modes to create a RAW file, that would be fantastic.

Battery and processing power seems cheap enough these days, but maybe it still matters. Is the reliability of the camera affected by the moving sensor? Pentax guys claim great reliability.

As do the Olympus people. Added bonus -- less centering problems with the lens.

Of course, with regards to the "success" of my photography, that point was reached long ago with the 5D, so, I guess what I'm saying is, well, what am I saying?

(before the 6D2 came out, I said that a camera that split the size of the SL1 and 6D would be perfect, and, well, that's the R)

I want to swap my APSc gear for the SL2 with the smaller wide and prime lenses and a super zoom for travel by plane. I don't worry about size when traveling by car.

When I go to Japan, I bring all my lenses -- they fit in a single backpack (with the camera and one lens in the bag I carry around with me). The R won't change that except that if I got the 28-70 / 2, it would take the place of the 24 / 1.4A, 35 / 1.4A, 50 / 1.4A, and 70 / 2.8A macro. So, even though the 28-70 / 2 is relatively large, it would be significantly more convenient (although I'd give up a stop and macro, but it's worth that trade).

I'm there. Everything but my 100-400 fits into my back pack. The problem is that it requires me to check baggage on short trips. If I'm traveling with people, they all carry everything on and have to wait 30 minutes for me to get my checked baggage. On a long trip, where everyone checks baggage anyway, it's less of a problem.

Of course, if you go to one camera and one lens, you can just put it over your shoulder and still carry on. Interesting thought.

I've never checked my camera gear -- it always goes with me.

I don't either, but if I bring a backpack of camera gear, I have to check the rest of my stuff.  Believe me, I can replace a couple of days worth of clothes and shaving kit much cheaper than I can replace my camera gear.   I still have to check bags if I bring my main system.

more base ISO DR (assuming it's pretty much the same sensor as the 5D4), and IBIS. Whoops! Strike the last one.

If the next one has IBIS........

I'd bet heavily against it. The reason the Z has IBIS is because Nikon is buying the Sony sensor assembly which comes with IBIS. Canon has no interest in IBIS in the near future. It is because of that, that I am considering hanging on to the 6D2 for a while to see where things go, and then deciding if switching to the Z isn't the best move.

The Nikon looks good. They are well behind Canon in lenses for the new mount, though...

They're f/1.8 primes look mighty good!

There is more to lens quality than F stops and focal lengths, so you may be right.  The RF lenses just look more interesting.  All of the Nikon lenses could have been made for the old mont, unless I'm missing something.   The Canon lenses take advantage of the new mount.

...as they are in DSLR ultra wide lenses. Wider is better.

Wide is better still with lots of pixels. Thus, the Z7.

I like more pixels.   I don't need more than I have that often, but better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.  I like big prints and I like to crop heavily in some cases, particularly when I don't want to a wider lens in the middle of a shoot.

A 5Dsr equivalent is probably in the near future for the R lineup.