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 ...

if you don’t have a camera go for the Canon R6 Mark II but if you can wait, wait for the R6 III & its specs and if they suits you, go for it or buy the R6 II after the release of the R6 Mark III since the Mark II prices will drop even more!

...but wanting to still choose a model with capability to still perform well in low light in the case I do want to shoot some events, which I believe the Sony is known for? Canon's mirrorless bodies are just as capable as Sony's in low light—where are you seeing claims of it being otherwise? Dependi...

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...

I wouldn't wait for a camera that's been announced yet. The r6iii has been rumored since May, there's no official confirmation. Now they say it might get announced next week. But earlier in the summer people also said it'd be announced and it didn't come. So I would go for the R5 II if you can affor...