Sell the R5 and get an R7 and R? Crazy?

KevinRA wrote:

mraifman wrote:

I'm curious, I see you shoot with the ef 300 f/2.8 mk ii. Have you tried that via adapter with the M6II?

Sorry not extensively tried it with the M6II - but from what I have done it is very very sharp wide open and very consistent - can be very sharp (although AF seems slightly less reliable) with 1.4X TC - and often adequately sharp with great care with the 2X as long as technique perfect - but definitely needs some careful sharpening and hit rate lower than on R5 or 5DRS - and lower than M6II with 500 f/4 + 1.4X TC.

How does that lens in particular perform on the crop sensor? I would think it would do quite well because it is so sharp but never assume!

The R7 likely will do better than the M6II due to better AF - it should shine even with a 1.4X TC - I suspect would be competent but not exceptional with a 2X TC - since this is equiv of a 3X TC on say 7D mark 2 in terms of reach in simplest terms per pixel on bird.

R7 plus the 300 2.8 ii would be a powerful combination and give probably not too dissimilar results to the R5 with 500 f/4. I think if you are continually focal length limited - and always cropping out the edges - the R7 is a no brainer.

I'm not in that position though and with the luxury of a 500f/4 and at a push a 2X TC on that if desperately needed (not perfect combo) really like my R5. One day maybe will buy a 2nd one if used prices come down to ~2k ish. It has the best ergonomics IMHO of al cameras along with the R6 which can also help get the shot.

Thanks! Appreciate the report. I think the 300mm f/2.8 mk ii is just about the most lens I can handle handheld and I place a premium on being able to walk around a shoot without a tripod. That ruled out the ef 500 f/4 mk i for me because it is so heavy comparably. Considered the ef 500 mk ii but jsut too expensive for me right now...though with the ef 300 f/2.8+r7 we're getting close to the cost of just getting an ef 500mm f/4 (still about two pounds heavier than the 300mm f/2.8 though). So that's kind of the reasoning I went through on this.