R6 or R8

McT65 wrote:

MarshallG wrote:

HI’d generally say that the R6 is a better camera. The R8 has higher resolution and a better autofocus system. However, R8 lacks IBIS, which is very useful for video. R8 also has lower viewfinder resolution, and lower frame rate for shooting bursts.

With that said, understand that there are a lot of photographers who highly value fast autofocus and high frame rates, which is very important in shooting sports and fast moving wildlife… but not so much for other forms of photography. The R8 is smaller and uses a smaller battery which won’t last as long. If small size is important, that’s a consideration. Most serious photographers prefer a larger body, because we rely upon using the controls as we shoot.

My sincere answer is try to swing the R6 II, but we all have our budgets. The R6 owners here have been very happy with their cameras, so you can be confident that you won’t have regrets. I have the very similar, higher resolution R5 and I’m very satisfied.

I would rather put the money into lenses so the cost of the R6II is out of reach for me.

I don’t photograph wildlife/birds or sport so don’t need fast autofocus, frame rates, or a lot of reach. I just need a camera for travel, portraits and family stuff.

I prefer larger bodies as I’m used to DSLR size, but the R6 is similar in size to the APSC Canon Dxx series which I have mainly used in the past. The R8 is quite a bit smaller so I’d probably need the extension plate for the bottom.

The deal breaker may be the single card slot. I once had an SD card failure following a trip to another country and lost everything that was on the card. Now I always use lots of smaller capacity cards so I don’t have all my photos on the one card; that way I would only lose some of them.

I used the RP (same form factor as R8 ) and the 6D Mk2 for about a year. For travel to Iceland and Eastern Europe the RP was my main camera and the 6D stayed locked away. Every night I backed up the SD card into one of those large 4TB portable backup systems. I never needed more than 2 batteries daily for photography. I also had the extended grip for my pinkie finger. Sure for video only static shots were taken. All the moving videos even with IS lens were jarring.

Overall it was a fine camera and very capable and now same form factor with better guts for $1500 . Served me well and after about a year and a half I moved to the R.

I didn't shoot sports or birds  just mostly family outings and travel.  It was coupled with the RF 24-105 L and the RF 35 F1.8 and at the time had some F1.4 Sigma EF lenses.