I’m planning an important trip to Japan, and I’m torn between these two cameras. Besides using it for travel, I’ll also be taking photos of cars at events, landscapes, and so on.

I’ve always been a Canon user—I like how they work, I love their color science, their handling—everything feels great. However, the other day I got to try out a Sony A7C II, and it completely changed my perspective. I was pretty set on getting an R6 Mark II (based on all the reviews I’ve seen, though I haven’t actually tested it myself). But after trying the A7C II, I was really impressed by how compact it is, how great the autofocus works, and how sharp the images are.

Now I’m unsure… What do you think? On the other hand, there are rumors about the Canon R6 Mark III, which could bring the price of the Mark II down and make it a more attractive option, but for now, it’s all just speculation.

I’d also like to start doing some nighttime photography, so good stabilization and high ISO performance with minimal noise are important to me. From the reviews, the R6 seems to excel in these areas…

I don’t know what to do. I still have three months to decide before my trip, but this decision is giving me so much doubt!

• ⁠Budget: 2000€ • ⁠Country: Spain • ⁠Condition: New • ⁠Type of Camera: Full frame Mirrorless • ⁠Intended use: Travel and cars. • ⁠If photography; what style: ?? • ⁠If video what style: ?? • ⁠What features do you absolutely need: In body stabilization. • ⁠Portability: Not very important, but i care. • ⁠Cameras you're considering: Tittle. R6 Mark II and A7C II. • ⁠Cameras you already have: Canon AT-1, Canon EOS 600, Canon 2000D.

Hi guys, I am a new wedding photographer. I currently have the original canon 7d body with 18-135mm lens and 50mm f/1.8 lens.

I'm trying to figure out if I should purchase purchase the Canon R6 iii OR completely change it up to a Sony A7 IV

What are your thoughts and recommendations?

I’ve been renting cameras for the past few weeks to test out what I like. But it only made the decision harder. I have rented a Sony A7C, a Canon R6 Mark II, and a Sony A7iv. I just sold my last rig (A6000 w/ kit lens) to a high school kid getting his feet wet in photography and am not invested in any ecosystem at this time.

The first two rentals, I went with flagship lenses from Sony and Canon. My last rental I went budget and rented a third-party Sony mount lens. Still got good results with the type of photography I am doing, but still prefer the native lenses.

With the newer releases from Sony and their new auto focus, I am leaning more towards them because of the ability for budget lenses. But I really did enjoy the feel and user experience of the canon. But now I started playing chess with my options.

-Canon R6M2 - RF 24-70mm 2.8 -Sony A7CII - Sony FE 24-70MM 2.8 -Sony A7RV - Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 Art

Just looking for some insights from people who own or use multiple platforms. Budget is around $5K.

Thanks in advance.

Hello,

I've quite literally potato'd my brain over deciding which of these two cameras I would like to buy given a number of circumstances, and I need your opinions on which I should go for!!

Firstly, I only begun looking into photography recently as I have discovered my parents do not use some old canon EF lenses (24-70 2.8L II USM, 24-105 4L IS, and 70-200 2.8L IS USM). This would save the money from buying lenses as they are in pretty good condition and from my research are good quality. My use case will be predominantly for hiking up mountains in all sorts of weather and taking landscape photography. I am not interested in fast paced photography.

This lead me to researching an ef-rf adapter for a R6 ii and using the lenses there. The R6 ii is an amazing option but quite expensive and a bit big/heavier than what I want to use it for. Naturally the R8 is a cheaper lighter option but I was not too sure on the lack of ibis (I think it's nice to have) and apparent poorer weather sealing.

Some more research lead me to discover Sony's range of cameras - particularly the a7c ii. I do love the small form factor it has even when compared to the R8, however for a couple hundred more you obtain more megapixels, IBIS and a smaller body! I really wish my parents went for Sony...

The only problem here is now having to use an adapter. After some research the sigma mc-11 adapter seems to do well for still photography, but is very poor for videography (which is a bummer but not essential). But it is not weather sealed!! Which turned me off from the option, and started looking the metabones V adapter which is weather proof and works better with canon. But this is almost 700 dollars..... At that point I could buy a second hand E mount lens for Sony.

Hence my ultimatum on what I should buy:

The R6 II for a objectively good camera but big body size and high price, or the R8 that seems like a cheap-out option when compared to I feel the objectively better a7c ii. (And with the addition of my canon lenses working well with an ef-rf adaptor)

The a7c ii that I truly think is all my desires in one camera and would love to go for, with an expensive adaptor (that doesn't have fully supported autofocus), or convert myself to the Sony eco system...

Help me choose and option please!!

EDIT:

So I ended up trying all three, and for starters IBIS is nice to have but no essential. For stills you won't really notice it and I don't think is worth the extra 1k. The other features of the R6 II I simply won't be taking advantage of that make the camera good. An R8 with lens stabilisation is more than enough for a steady picture. The a7c ii is a great camera and for the long term Sony provides a good future proof solution for a diversity of lenses, but I won't be able to use those my canon lenses on Sony and save money that way so canon R8 it is. Honestly if I had no lenses to begin with I would have gone with Sony though.

I need a camera for both photo and video purposes especially , I don't have a good idea about the new mirrorless cameras and this is the first time im buying my own camera. Before i used 700d dslr for 5 years.... Someone please help me with this… Budget is 2000$

I shoot sports videography and photography - mostly pro soccer. Leaning more into videos lately including short documentaries and player features. I shoot a lot of slow motion and a decent amount of low light situations.

Currently shoot on a Canon 6D Mark II. My lenses are the Sigma EF 24-70 and the Canon EF 70-200, 2.8 (I would not keep this lens as it's version 1 and not sure how much life it has left).

I want to make the jump to mirrorless but for the life of me I can't decide which camera to buy - the Sony A7 IV or the Canon R6 Mark II. Obviously I'm used to the Canon interface but I've rented Sony's in the past and am not put off by the switch. Most professionals in my field shoot Sony.

I will need a 24-70 and a 70-200 or even something longer.

Just looking for a push one way or another before I make the investment. Any recommendations?

I’m currently indecisive on which body I should upgrade to, I currently shoot on a 6d mark ii with a canon 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 and mainly shoot basketball and sometimes portraits.

I was wondering what camera body would be best the r6 mark ii or sony a7iv for both photo and video content.

Thanks!!