dmrimer wrote:
Lenses also play a part. If you already have all new/full speed glass the R5/6 are not slouches at 12FPS with amazing tracking around the frame.
If you have older lenses like I do, the R5 7FPS stuttering viewfinder was not workable for me. I shot at 20 FPS and dealt with banding (any electronic screen in background) and rolling shutter (only on FAST objects, think a baseball, volleyball spike, water polo throw, soccer kick) that’s never an issue for the people/players themselves.
If you want to go with the R3, you’re getting a more capable tool. It drives lenses faster to focus, some by a substantial percentage (like 1D to 5D difference). Eye control autofocus is revelatory if it works for your eyes… for me it enables me to think more about composition and timing than I can with a joystick… and the Smart Controller with the AF-on button is a huge upgrade in its own right. Whether getting the shot is worth it to you depends on many factors—how much money do you have, and how much would the upgrade help you make?
In my opinion, for a sports shooter, you should consider a used 1Dx3 (~$4k) if you can’t justify the R3 for your needs.
Advantages to the R3 fewer people talk about:
Illuminated buttons, GPS, stickier tracking, faster power on, lighter build for the size, incredible new grip material, tracking always ready to be enabled, the best high ISO performance from Canon, full bit depth for photos at all speeds in all shutter modes, and some of the best colors Canon has ever produced. Also enormously sophisticated anti flicker technology. Electronic shutter being so good (though less dynamic range at lowest 100-400 ISO) means the camera’s longevity is potentially much more than when mech shutter is used more often.
R6 is cheaper and if you’re just shooting gym, I’d say it makes more sense to buy an R6 and a used 200mm f/2 (if you don’t already have that caliber of glass). As always, glass matters more for most uses. It depends on if you need to get /every/ moment, because the R3 is better at that… but the R6 with proper indoor sports glass will get better looking images than the R3 with a 70-200mm, if your concern is more with the quality and less with getting every moment (which the R6 is no slouch at anyway).
I cannot emphasize enough that any of these options would blow away your 6D2 quite handily. Good luck with the choices!
I do not currently have RF lenses, so I will currently be working with EF lenses. For R3 I have many advantages and one disadvantage which is the price. For the R6 I have a lot of drawbacks. I shoot competitions, a lake is important for me to capture the moment. I currently do not make the most of it, which is why the downside I have in R3 is price. The question is whether the R6 capabilities can also cover me at least 80 percent of the needs I need. Unfortunately there is no 1Dx3 \ 2 second hand for sale here, so this is not an option that can be considered.