From 6D to RP? (R?)

christ0f wrote:

Hello,

Now the RP is in a very good price so I was considering a change of my still good, old 6D. The main reasons are: it's lighter, better AF and video that I do occasionally and focus stacking - doing lot of macro with my 100 2.8 (non-L)

I have some doubts:

- the viewfinder, I'm simply used to that from dslr, I have seen few of mirrorless, and thought Fuji X-T3 has a one that is ok, but I guess RP is not in the same league

- dynamic range - what I already read, I'm not gaining here, which is a pity after those years

- high iso noise - I'm often doing some fire-camp sessions, using ISO 6400

- generally ergonomics: I'm not sure how I also survive without the top screen..

- battery life

I'd get the set probably with native 24-105 L and 35 1.8 (to replace my Sigma 35 1.4, making set really light). Still keeping 16-35/4 via adapter.

Many of the ticks here would be probably solved by R (not RP), but that is more expensive and I don't know why... has not the focus stacking on board. R5/R6 looks ideal on paper, but R6 is 2.5x more expensive that RP and 1.5 than R.

From your experience, I guess many of you have switched from 6D or 5D II/III to those - do you have some comments?

Thanks!

Yeah, most of your gripes are solved in the R.  So, I would personally probably go for that if you could   That said, I am not an RP user.  I sort of went from the 6d to the R, but the Sony A7iii was in between the two.  The R improved on the 6d in every way except battery life pretty much.  It’s a great camera, and while it’s more expensive than the RP, it is also a great value right now because it’s price has dropped so much.