R6 VS R3 Which camera is better?

expro wrote:

I’ve never regretted buying the more expensive option - it’s always turned out to be a joy and beyond expectations. I was the same as you when I bought my first 1 series almost sick at the expense! But once I started using it well wow just incredible and for ever.

a potential issue with these forums is that those who don’t buy the 1 series either don’t need it or try to justify their cheaper choice.

Most of those who do buy the 1 series left this forum many years ago - because when you have one you realise those that don’t use one really don’t understand the benefits nor share the same wants/needs….

There is nothing wrong with choosing the 'expensive' option if that floats your boat and you want it, especially if you can realistically justify it - I have 3 bicycles that each cost a lot more than the R3, two of them top-of-the-line Pro models that cost more than 3x an R3 each. I race them all at a high level chasing seconds over those I compete against and so that is justification to me, being on the podium and winning, using the best tools I can get. Someone who shoots with an R3 and has similar justification has made the correct choice.

However, if someone who never raced asked me what bike they should get, I would steer them towards a good spec that would be a joy to ride but avoid the most expensive simply because the advantages are incremental in the real World and will largely yield no benefit beyond just wanting the 'best'. Naturally, if they still wanted to spend more and get the 'best' then that is fine too - but they would make an informed choice and know that they are doing so not for performance gains but rather because they want to splash out and get 'the best'.

It is the same with cameras. I too like to have good tech that helps me create - especially if it makes it easier leaving me to tend more to composition. But something like the R3 or pending R1 is utterly pointless to people like me, who do not need, realistically, the extras that these models bring over an R6/R5.

One of the reasons I ditched DSLR was for the lighter, smaller bodies and lenses that Mirrorless offers - so to go the other way and buy a large Pro model would be daft to me for what I want.

It has literally nothing to do with not understanding any benefits the R3 brings over the R6 and is entirely based upon need and real-World usage. I could buy 10 R3's and then 10 R1's when available and not see my bank balance flinch - I'm fortunate that way. However, I would not use either body, ever, because my hobby is such that I can create the images I want with an R5 and so do not need an R3 to sit in the cupboard gathering dust because I refuse to carry it about. As it is, my R5 is not used nearly as much as my smartphone or GoPro.

The point is, only the OP can decide if the R3 is 'better' for him vs the R6. Often people get too caught up with specs and top trumps and lose sight of what will do the job without going overboard for the wrong reasons.

'Better' is subjective in this context. it is not about which camera is literally the 'best' all the time. It is more about what camera is 'better' for the photographer's needs and skill set. If the R6 does all the OP needs then that could be the 'better' camera because it fills the brief better. Likewise, if he needs the extras that the R3 offers, then that would be the 'better' choice.

But as I wrote, only the OP can decide. Reading this thread the R5 offers all he needs by adding weather-sealing and MP over the R6. I would therefore recommend that to him. However, it is his choice to make and if he decides he needs a Sports and Action orientated Pro body or that having the most expensive model makes him feel all warm and fuzzy then that is what he will likely get. As to which is the 'better' camera for him only his actual usage will decide.