I'm planning to upgrade from a 250D to an R6 or an R6 Mark II. I mostly shoot landscapes, but I'm also planning on shooting sports, events and more videos. Here in Italy the 1st gen R6 retails for 1400€, while the Mark II costs at least 1800€. Does the Mark II have any substantial upgrade over the Mark I that justifies the higher price? Like better ISO performance, better dynamic range, better IBIS?

Before I pull the trigger and upgrade from my ever so loyal 5DIII - would anybody like to throw their hat into the ring and argue otherwise?

Thanks as always! Advice here always considered and much appreciated ~

Hello, I have been an Canon RP shooter for the last year and am considering an upgrade to either the R6 or the R6 mk ii. Reasons for upgrading would be, IBIS, longer battery life, more comfortable form factor, dual card slots, and better dynamic range. I don't currently do much video but like the idea of being able to do video in the future if I choose to. One of the reasons I am considering the original R6 is price. I've noticed that used R6's have dropped in price significantly since the introduction of the Mark II, as expected. Especially in the UK where I am currently living, Park Cameras has a used R6 for £1,559, in "Like New condition." Whereas the R6 MK II is currently retailing for £2,779. Is it worth still considering an original R6 in 2023? Am I missing something?

In December of last year I got myself a R6 Mark II to replace my EOS R. After using it for 3 months I gave it to one of my family members because they needed a camera, and I wanted to justify an upgrade to a R5 anyway. After a month shooting with the R5 here are some of my experience, hopefully this helps you decide between the two cameras.

Auto focus, the R6 II never managed to miss focus even in dark light and fast moving subjects and always held that focus, the R5 while still very good, is worse, most notably it locks onto the subject slower. But it’s not a big enough difference to be a deciding factor for me.

Image quality, in terms of photos, the R5 is better most of the time. More details, more (little) dynamic range, much more ability to crop. The R6 II does have less noise in lower light, but once again not enough of a difference to be a deciding factor, for me.

Video, for my uses, the supersampled 4K60 on the R6 II is much more useful than the 8K on the R5, so for me I actually like the R6 II better for video, but if you want 4K 120 then the R5 is it.

Build quality, coming from the EOS R, the R6 felt much less “solid” in my hands, while the R5 feels similar. And the EVF on the R5 is a higher resolution which I really like.

Overall, for my uses I much rather the R5 simply due to the build quality and image quality, but if I was a sports photographer or something similar I’d probably go for the R6 II.