Poll, R mount and 3ed party lenses

sportyaccordy wrote:

MAC wrote:

yes the R7 + RF 100-400 is a value for reach (cheap is the wrong word) and hard to beat with other systems

I should have used "affordable"... "cheap" doesn't always mean good value IMO.

ok, forgiven

I think Canon will build on the R6II which also will be hard to beat with other systems

In certain aspects, sure, but not as an all arounder IMO

e-shutter, BIF, pj's dream camera

your future A7R3 is now on sale for $2K, and a good landscape camera, but some users feel the ergonomics are just awful.

your A7III (seems old in the tooth) and the lenses you have are really superior?

Body wise, sure my A7III and the A7R3 I want to replace it with are "old", but Canon RF has nothing that can replace either for the money.

R6II is just a tad more and blows both of those away

Lens wise my lenses aren't amazing,

well, I have a few RF lenses I feel are amazing - my RF 24-105 F4L with nano focus and control ring set to ECC - best 24-105 ever made - I got mine 3 years ago for $899

and I have the RF 85 F2 IS that can be had for $499.

I have the EF 100L which is amazing, and the RF 100L can be had for $999 and is even more amazing.

but again for the $3000 or so I'll be in for the A7R3 + current lenses, or $4000 or so for the A7R3, current lenses and an UWA, again RF doesn't have anything that matches on both the body + lens front.

In addition to my RF glass, I have great EF glass, so RF doesn't have to all be in place.

Weirdly I think Nikon has a comparable kit for the $$$ as well so Canon RF is kind of the odd man out for me.

EF supplements until the RF roadmap is mature