EOS R6 Mark III RF24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM Lens Kit

I think its hardest competition is probably the R6 III, with a 32MP sensor, and 7K/60 Canon Cinema Raw for essentially the same price. I imagine Sony are trying to protect the FX3 by skipping RAW in the A7 range.

personally I would go for the r5 for the higher resolution sensor and better evf, personally I also prefer the top screen instead of the top dial. the r6iii is better for video, has better autofocus, pre capture, and faster shooting speed with slightly better rolling shutter. if you shoot pro level

It's like it knows the R6 III is getting announced in a couple of hours and it's pushing you to an upgrade. Very sneaky, Canon.

I'm confused, why would the Mark III be worse in low-light? Do you need any of the more advanced video features of the III? Here's a comparison list of the feature differences. If not, and you really just want something like your original R6 but with less overheating issues, then the Mark II is a lo

You can get a refurb Z8 for new A7V money if you hunt the sales. Z6iii is much cheaper and still extremely good, if you don't need the pixels, the Z6iii is simply a better choice than the A7iv (in fact I'd argue the Z5ii is generally a better choice than the A7iv, having owned both) Despite the use

Can't go wrong with either. I use the (much older) EOS R for a lot of the family and portrait work I do, and I find its 32MP resolution to be a nice little bump over the 20MP to 24MP sensors I've used previously, but it's not a huge difference. I'd personally spend the extra for the R6 III if I were

Disagree to an extent, the regular series was a nice all around. A7s for video, r photo, regular less impressive at either but solid at both. They introduced the fx (3 and 30) and nerfed these intentionally to not compete with them. This is 100 more than the canon r6iii and substantially worse at vi

The R5C is a video first design and has Canon's video firmware and menu system. It's an excellent camera but it's not designed for wildlife at all. You would get a much better hybrid experience for those use cases our of the R6 III.

I have good news on the first point, my friend: Canon isn't claiming any particular technological leaps with this sensor, but our initial testing shows that it has even faster readout speeds than the lower-resolution chip found in the EOS R6 II. The R6 III has some truly impressive rolling shutter r

Yeah and unfortunately that's a complete misconception but very, very widespread. Because people pixel peep their photos at 100% zoom, which puts higher resolution images under finer scrutiny so they look worse. Due to variance between sensor technology the R6 Mark III is an insignificant 0.01-0.07