M6 Mark 2 vs R7

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

If you are okay with the lens selection for the M system as well as not having a built-in EVF, I would personally go for the M6 II. It is smaller, lighter, and significantly cheaper, as is the system as a whole. Just be aware that with the announcement of crop RF-mount bodies, there may never be another EF-M lens or body released.

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

You must know the answer for yourself. Right now R7 can't be a substitution for M6 mk2, especially in terms of compactness or portability, but it meets the need only for a second body for those who have other RF bodies and lenses. I am pretty sure that M6 mk2 with EFM lenses can serve well quite a long time as long as they meet your need.

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

For M lenses you know what is available. For RF-s lenses you can only guess what will appear next to the two current kit zooms.  And my guess is you will have to be satisfied with

the RF 16mm f/2.8  over the Sigma ef-m 16mm f/1.4

the RF 35mm f/1.8 over the ef-m 32mm f/1.4

the RF 50mm f/1.8 stm over the Sigma ef-m 56mm f/1.4

That's just my guess of course, but for Canon it's more interesting not to develop f/1.4 RF-s lenses competing with and beating the RF full frame primes. The M lenses are the better options obviously.  The old "upgrade path" is back.....

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

I have gotten used to having 3 control dials on the body and a tilt screen.

Too bad I just do not like the swing out screens.

The M6II is a good tripod camera body too with a Sigma 56mm F1.4 or a Canon 32mm F1.4 things get so very sharp.

If you like advanced PP programs like DXO Photolab and like cool small tripods like I do then the small M6II is the way to go.

If you can handle problems like why is that photo blurry ? I used a fast shutter speed ?

Was it the lens IS ? Was it the IBIS ? Is there a firmware update for my lens ? Oh my !

If you get a R7 you might want to stick with RF and RF-s  glass.

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

I think Nnowak hit the nail on the head on most points. Where I'll say the R7 makes sense is if size and cost aren't as high of a priority, but additional performance, particularly for sports or birding (top autofocus) is. The R7's primary target is sports/birding (7D folks). The R10's primary target is vloggers (80D folks). Both offerings aim to "convert" existing DSLR holdouts.

The M6 II will always be cheaper, smaller and more compact and has a "full" lens lineup now. But as said, it's the end of the line, expect nothing more. Where the M6 II could be a hangup is if you need a fast zoom, example EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. You'll never see it on the M. I think the RF-S will though.

I'll say coming from an 80D, the R7 will feel more like home. But, what you've described about hiking? M is more compact and light especially with the lenses involved presently.

The RF-S should "fill out" it's lenses, over time. Takes time, years. However, EF-S glass adapts on the R7, too.

Thunder has a good point btw, I wouldn't expect any Sigma glass on the RF mount, anytime soon, maybe even never. If that is of interest, that could be a concern and you should consider the M. Again to my point, if IBIS or a fast crop zoom are a concern, then it's RF.

I should add I've shot the R with "compact" lenses before, it's not as "fun". The R7 is the same footprint as my R. I went against the grain myself and rebought the M6 II and all the M glass 2 weeks ago? Haven't regretted it a second I might add.

I have been considering adding one of the 32MP crop bodies to my FF system for telephoto photography.

I have huge hands so the downsizing has absolutely no benefit for me.  So, with either route I may go I will be keeping my EF lenses and using the adapter.  I don't care that the M or EF systems will be terminated.

There is of course the 90D as well which also uses the batteries from my 5DSR which would be easy.  However, I am leaning towards the M6 II, with EVF, since I can easily adapt Canon FD glass as well.

Now, since both systems are coming to a close, I also recommend buying used to avoid major depreciation.  Both the M6 II and 90D are only three years old so getting a barely used body is easy.  They are also starting to flood the market, with prices dropping, as people jump ship in a panic.

It may be cool to have a new R7 instead but it will be at least double the price of either of the used options.  The longer one waits to transition to RF the more developed the system will become.

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera  - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

RLight wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

I think Nnowak hit the nail on the head on most points. Where I'll say the R7 makes sense is if size and cost aren't as high of a priority, but additional performance, particularly for sports or birding (top autofocus) is. The R7's primary target is sports/birding (7D folks). The R10's primary target is vloggers (80D folks). Both offerings aim to "convert" existing DSLR holdouts.

The M6 II will always be cheaper, smaller and more compact and has a "full" lens lineup now. But as said, it's the end of the line, expect nothing more. Where the M6 II could be a hangup is if you need a fast zoom, example EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. You'll never see it on the M. I think the RF-S will though.

I'll say coming from an 80D, the R7 will feel more like home. But, what you've described about hiking? M is more compact and light especially with the lenses involved presently.

The RF-S should "fill out" it's lenses, over time. Takes time, years. However, EF-S glass adapts on the R7, too.

Thunder has a good point btw, I wouldn't expect any Sigma glass on the RF mount, anytime soon, maybe even never.

My point wasn't Sigma only, it was also about Canon RF-s primes in general, which means no RF-s 32mm f/1.4 too, as the RF 35mm f/1.8 IS stm is an upgrade path to a full frame body potentially generating more substantial lens sales, whereas a 32mm would keep customers on crop, as it's the best walk around 50mm field of view lens being capable of doing both landscapes AND portraits. The Sony 50mm f/1.2 G-master will beat it, but that's 778g. The Zeiss f/1.4 is the same. The Sigma Art is even worse as it's 800ish + adaper. The Canon f/1.2 L is 945g......

Look, if Canon ports over that 32mm with a bit faster AF, that's a clear sign Canon is serious about it's crop lenses as a lens line up on it's own, giving you the best on your crop sensor RF body. At the same time we all know it will stay demoted as an upgrade path.

If that is of interest, that could be a concern and you should consider the M. Again to my point, if IBIS or a fast crop zoom are a concern, then it's RF.

I should add I've shot the R with "compact" lenses before, it's not as "fun". The R7 is the same footprint as my R. I went against the grain myself and rebought the M6 II and all the M glass 2 weeks ago? Haven't regretted it a second I might add.

thunder storm wrote:

RLight wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

I think Nnowak hit the nail on the head on most points. Where I'll say the R7 makes sense is if size and cost aren't as high of a priority, but additional performance, particularly for sports or birding (top autofocus) is. The R7's primary target is sports/birding (7D folks). The R10's primary target is vloggers (80D folks). Both offerings aim to "convert" existing DSLR holdouts.

The M6 II will always be cheaper, smaller and more compact and has a "full" lens lineup now. But as said, it's the end of the line, expect nothing more. Where the M6 II could be a hangup is if you need a fast zoom, example EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. You'll never see it on the M. I think the RF-S will though.

I'll say coming from an 80D, the R7 will feel more like home. But, what you've described about hiking? M is more compact and light especially with the lenses involved presently.

The RF-S should "fill out" it's lenses, over time. Takes time, years. However, EF-S glass adapts on the R7, too.

Thunder has a good point btw, I wouldn't expect any Sigma glass on the RF mount, anytime soon, maybe even never.

My point wasn't Sigma only, it was also about Canon RF-s primes in general, which means no RF-s 32mm f/1.4 too, as the RF 35mm f/1.8 IS stm is an upgrade path to a full frame body potentially generating more substantial lens sales, whereas a 32mm would keep customers on crop,

agree

as it's the best walk around 50mm field of view lens being capable of doing both landscapes AND portraits.

exactamundo

The Sony 50mm f/1.2 G-master will beat it, but that's 778g. The Zeiss f/1.4 is the same. The Sigma Art is even worse as it's 800ish + adaper. The Canon f/1.2 L is 945g......

Look, if Canon ports over that 32mm with a bit faster AF, that's a clear sign Canon is serious about it's crop lenses

serious,?   LOL

as a lens line up on it's own, giving you the best on your crop sensor RF body.

At the same time we all know it will stay demoted as an upgrade path.

yep, demoted for sure

If that is of interest, that could be a concern and you should consider the M. Again to my point, if IBIS or a fast crop zoom are a concern, then it's RF.

I should add I've shot the R with "compact" lenses before, it's not as "fun". The R7 is the same footprint as my R. I went against the grain myself and rebought the M6 II and all the M glass 2 weeks ago? Haven't regretted it a second I might add.

MAC wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

I want a R7 to put behind one of my favorite lenses.

Big fan of the 32mp sensor. Love the grain !

I own a RF 35mm and an EF 100mm L that will fit.

My TS 35mm and EF-S 55-250 STM.too. That is enough that will fit.

I can wait until they are discounted at the end of the year at the refurbished store.

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

I want a R7 to put behind one of my favorite lenses.

Big fan of the 32mp sensor. Love the grain !

I own a RF 35mm and an EF 100mm L that will fit.

My TS 35mm and EF-S 55-250 STM.too. That is enough that will fit.

"if" I get an R7 at some point, I'd probably get the RF 18-150 kit and the RF100-400

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

I want a R7 to put behind one of my favorite lenses.

Big fan of the 32mp sensor. Love the grain !

I own a RF 35mm and an EF 100mm L that will fit.

My TS 35mm and EF-S 55-250 STM.too. That is enough that will fit.

"if" I get an R7 at some point, I'd probably get the RF 18-150 kit and the RF100-400

I regret not getting the RF 24-105mm L  when it was on sale at the Canon refurbished

store with the RP.

RF 24-105mm L.  That is the only RF lens I am interested in.

My favorite camera usage is the same as yours: lightweight hiking, small pack, small tripod. I bought my first Canon ILC 50 years ago! I’ve had many more over the years and the M is the best by far. It should be all you need. I don’t intend changing my system for 3-5 years and once people start dumping M cameras for shiny new gear, I will snag at least one more mkii used. I use all the EF-M lenses except the standard zooms. For your use, the 11-22, 32 and 55-200 are ideal. I also often take the 28, which I use for stitched panos and macro. After your 80D there will be a learning curve, but the time investment is worth it.

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

I want a R7 to put behind one of my favorite lenses.

Big fan of the 32mp sensor. Love the grain !

I own a RF 35mm and an EF 100mm L that will fit.

My TS 35mm and EF-S 55-250 STM.too. That is enough that will fit.

"if" I get an R7 at some point, I'd probably get the RF 18-150 kit and the RF100-400

I regret not getting the RF 24-105mm L when it was on sale at the Canon refurbished

store with the RP.

RF 24-105mm L. That is the only RF lens I am interested in.

I got mine for $899 on sale new when they first introduced it

I also have the RF 85 F2 IS instead of the siggy 56 f1.4, but you may choose to not get that one since you have the great 100L

I don't see the value in an R7 over what you and I already have unless you do birds or field sports and get a long tele like a RF100-400.  Since I don't already have a 18-150, I'd go for the RF kit - but with inflation, I'll wait for things to cool down - too hot for me these days

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

I want a R7 to put behind one of my favorite lenses.

Big fan of the 32mp sensor. Love the grain !

I own a RF 35mm and an EF 100mm L that will fit.

My TS 35mm and EF-S 55-250 STM.too. That is enough that will fit.

"if" I get an R7 at some point, I'd probably get the RF 18-150 kit and the RF100-400

I regret not getting the RF 24-105mm L when it was on sale at the Canon refurbished

store with the RP.

RF 24-105mm L. That is the only RF lens I am interested in.

I got mine for $899 on sale new when they first introduced it

I also have the RF 85 F2 IS instead of the siggy 56 f1.4, but you may choose to not get that one since you have the great 100L

I don't see the value in an R7 over what you and I already have unless you do birds or field sports and get a long tele like a RF100-400. Since I don't already have a 18-150, I'd go for the RF kit - but with inflation, I'll wait for things to cool down - too hot for me these days

I am thinking R7 could replace my 7D for rainy days ?

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

I want a R7 to put behind one of my favorite lenses.

Big fan of the 32mp sensor. Love the grain !

I own a RF 35mm and an EF 100mm L that will fit.

My TS 35mm and EF-S 55-250 STM.too. That is enough that will fit.

"if" I get an R7 at some point, I'd probably get the RF 18-150 kit and the RF100-400

I regret not getting the RF 24-105mm L when it was on sale at the Canon refurbished

store with the RP.

RF 24-105mm L. That is the only RF lens I am interested in.

I got mine for $899 on sale new when they first introduced it

I also have the RF 85 F2 IS instead of the siggy 56 f1.4, but you may choose to not get that one since you have the great 100L

I don't see the value in an R7 over what you and I already have unless you do birds or field sports and get a long tele like a RF100-400. Since I don't already have a 18-150, I'd go for the RF kit - but with inflation, I'll wait for things to cool down - too hot for me these days

I am thinking R7 could replace my 7D for rainy days ?

I still have my 7d2 and keep for rainy days

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

m100 wrote:

MAC wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

lots of good info from the folks posting so far

it is a tough choice these days with so many options and depends on ones shooting style

as an RP and 6d owner and a M6II and 7d2 owner here are my perspectives

1) if you mainly shoot sports or wildlife - skip immediately to the R7 with tele glass

2) I have no interest in R10 - I don't see enough RF-s glass

3) if you mainly do landscapes and portraits, I can recommend my combo: M6II + 11-22 + 32 + dxo PL5

4) if you are a one lens does all person, then for me I chose the RP + RF 24-105 F4L - I just did a run and gun parade and I needed 24 mm and 105 mm a lot and this was the one lens solution for me during the hour I took 1500 photos - no time to change lenses - the m6II stayed at home

well - it turns out I love my M6II sometimes and I love my RP when I want that 24-105 L glass and at some point I may add the R7 when I want long focals for sports, action, and wildlife

imagine that - Canon selling me all of these

actually if weight and cost are not an issue, the R5 is the all in one camera - but I like to roll with multiple cams tailored to my needs - specifically low weight and power matters to me

best wishes on your quest

I want a R7 to put behind one of my favorite lenses.

Big fan of the 32mp sensor. Love the grain !

I own a RF 35mm and an EF 100mm L that will fit.

My TS 35mm and EF-S 55-250 STM.too. That is enough that will fit.

"if" I get an R7 at some point, I'd probably get the RF 18-150 kit and the RF100-400

I regret not getting the RF 24-105mm L when it was on sale at the Canon refurbished

store with the RP.

RF 24-105mm L. That is the only RF lens I am interested in.

I got mine for $899 on sale new when they first introduced it

I also have the RF 85 F2 IS instead of the siggy 56 f1.4, but you may choose to not get that one since you have the great 100L

I don't see the value in an R7 over what you and I already have unless you do birds or field sports and get a long tele like a RF100-400. Since I don't already have a 18-150, I'd go for the RF kit - but with inflation, I'll wait for things to cool down - too hot for me these days

I am thinking R7 could replace my 7D for rainy days ?

I still have my 7d2 and keep for rainy days

And my 7D has a good strong solid hot shoe mount !

The R7 will too or is that flash mount adapter a safety break off thing ?

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1663792-REG/canon_4943c001_ad_e1_multi_function_shoe_adapter.html/reviews?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A5451

nnowak wrote:

CamerEyes wrote:

Taking my chance to shoot out this question. Rejoining the forum after almost a decade of being away from photography websites.

Now on the hunt for cropped body, coming from an 80D. I know the R7 has all the bells and whistles of the new Canon tech and hardware. Does not mean it's worth that much money compared to the really cute and capable M6 Mark 2 which I tried in the store over the weekend and found impressive for its size. Mostly I do take photos on foot, while doing a bit of hiking and occasionally from hillside locations, with a small tripod in a small backpack.

Or maybe I should invest in new tech like the R7 so I don't have to change it for the next 3-5 years?

Canon is slowly phasing out the M system in favor of the R system. The M6 II has already been discontinued in several places around the world and the higher level M5 was discontinued a couple years ago.

If the M system already has everything you could want in the way of lenses and bodies, then don't be afraid to go for it. However, you should assume that no updates or new lenses are coming in the future for the M system.

The crop R cameras just launched and the line is still being filled out. A smaller, lighter, and cheaper R crop body is rumored to be coming, as well as several crop R lenses. If you go with the R7 right now, you may need to rely on full frame RF lenses or adapted EF/EF-S lenses to meet your needs in the interim. If you are planning to adapt your existing lenses that you are currently using on your 80D, the current lack of crop RF glass will be less of a concern.

Basically, your question is coming right as Canon is in the middle of a transition and there is no perfect answer. A year or two from now and the choice would be more obvious.

A few side notes on the R7... While not as small as the M6 II, it is still quite a bit smaller and lighter than your 80D. The R7 can reuse your 80D batteries while the M6 II uses a different, lower capacity battery. Would the IBIS of the R7 allow you to forego the small tripod?

Your comment nails it for me. Thank you. I think the R7 and the entire RF mount is the future of Canon cameras. That's not a debate anymore. So it's where new tech, lenses, accessories are going to be. And I may not want to miss that!