No doubt, the Canon EOS R5 is a fantastically powerful camera, but it is also on the more expensive side of things, and it might have more features than you actually need. The EOS R6 contains a lot of the advanced capabilities of its big cousin but comes in at a much more affordable price. Does that make it the best all-around mirrorless camera? This great video review takes a look at how the R6 holds up after a few months.
Coming to you from Hyun Ralph Jeong, this fantastic video review takes a look at the new Canon EOS R6 and how it holds up after a few months of usage. While the EOS R5 is undoubtedly a fantastic camera, a lot of people do not really need 8K raw video or 45-megapixel images, and the added storage and processing requirements can cause issues as well. On the other hand, the R6 still offers the impressive autofocus and continuous burst rate capabilities of the R5, but with more manageable 4K video (up to 60 fps) and a more standard 20-megapixel sensor, all at a more affordable price ($2,499). Altogether, the R6 looks to be a fantastic all-around option; check out the video above for the full rundown.
Can't even consider an R6 until the EF to RF adapters are again available. They've been out of stock and backordered now for a few months. I have a few (okay, more than a few) EF lenses, and I want to use them. The 3rd party adapters apparently have issues.
So if Canon wants me to buy an R6, get the adapter and ring adapter back into the stores.
I got one of the cheaper third party EF-RF adapters on Amazon (the JJC branded one) and so far AF works flawlessly. Really my only complaint is that there's some rotational wiggle on the EF side of the adapter and I have no idea if it's weather sealed, but depending on what you shoot, it might be good enough to get by.
I'll probably upgrade to a proper Canon one when that rumored locking EF mount adapter comes out.
I have an EOS R and the basic OEM adapter and I can say for certain that it is weather sealed.
Do your EF lenses have any play with the OEM adapter? I'd want an adapter with no wiggle at all so that manual focus lenses with video don't have that movement when you move the focus ring.
No wiggle from the adapter to the camera or the lens to the adapter. If you hold the camera firmly and twist the lens barrel hard you will get very slight movement. (Roll) Maybe .25mm with new lenses. Could be slightly more with a well used lens that's been mounted / unmounted for years. As for pitch and yaw movements, absolutely no play! Very tight. Manual focusing and zooming will be no problem at all even with a lens with stiff focus and or zoom.
Thanks! That's exactly what I wanted to know!
No. dpReview is very clear that the Nikon Z5 is the better camera ...if not perhaps the best.
https://youtu.be/eJAVVlKfwRw
As much as I love Chris and Jordan, that video is specifically about entry-level cameras. The R6 is absolutely not that.
On top of that as much as i like the guys i disagree with them on handling and auto focus
Totally agree. The R6 is a pro level camera. So frustrating to hear these points of views as it always comes across as elitist and is also belittling to anyone who has chosen this camera for their professional photography business.
A few weeks ago I saw a review of the R6 which had the title 'best student camera'. The guy is a photography teacher and this is the camera he recommends his students to buy to learn photography. Beginners. Elitist not to mention irresponsible given that students have no money and could easily learn everything he is teaching on a second-hand 5Dmkiii.
Can you even read the damn title? That's the RP not the R6
Paolo Bugnone The article’s title asks, “Is the Canon EOS R6 the Best All-Around Mirrorless Camera?”
Be happy I didn’t post a video about a m4/3 camera. (...which, IMO, is the platform with all of the better all-around mirrorless cameras.)
Chip on your shoulder?
None. I’ve tried all of these cameras. Every one has good and and not so good features. (They are all excellent.) each has features users may debate as to which makes the better camera. Photographers are free to like, dislike, and choose (and not choose) and no one should fault them.
But the article’s title is provocative— “Best”— and thus begs for argument. I’m only giving them what they ask for. And you think I have a chip on my shoulder?
Do you ask the author why must one camera be “best all-around”?
You and I both know it’s unlikely but you clicked the link nonetheless.
I stand by my comment as you stand by your proclamations.
You posted 2 links to DPR videos asking the same question and another comparing 2 cameras. You included your opinion as if it were fact. However in your reply to me the "Best" is for the user to decide. You contradicted yourself. You're just looking for an argument like most of the commenters on DPR. That' why I rarely go there anymore and this site is getting more like it everyday. You got the replies you wanted from me and others on here.
"Be happy I didn’t post a video about a m4/3 camera" Yes, chip on your shoulder.
"I’ve tried all of these cameras" Exactly what cameras? Can you prove that? You have an empty profile.
Go back to DPReview.
dpReview says it’s the Sony a7iii
https://youtu.be/Af9_fGEOAB8
"dpReview says it’s the Sony a7iii"
Might want to look a little closer.
My apologies for the typo
What claptrap!
It’s a camera, like many others...it takes photos. There is no such thing as the best camera’ Why does Fstoppers keep punting nonesense like this.
Well, camera manufacturers do make cameras targeted at specific genres of photography e.g. the Canon 1D mkiii which is sports camera. They also produce cameras for those photographers whose genre is not specific i.e. they run a photography business servicing a wide range of work.
Now you wouldn't want to purchase a camera which is designed for a certain niche if you were in the latter group as a more all-round type would be a better fit for your business model. Perhaps instead of 'the best camera' is should be 'one of the best cameras'. It's the English language, it's malleable, there's no need to get outraged about it is there?
Outraged!....hardly. We’re talking about cameras, what is there to be outraged about? What’s interesting about your comment is by labelling me as outraged you make yourself appear calm and reasonable. A dickhead albeit a calm and reasonable one.
That said sure there are some cameras due to their specs, like the Sony A9 for example, who in their right mind would choose a Canon! TIC, which lends itself to sports due to its high fps. But that’s not to say great sports photographs could not be had with a camera such as the A7R3 for example or even the humble box brownie! Too much emphasis is directed toward gear giving the idea that you can become a great photographer if you buy the right camera lens combo a myth often perpetuated on this very site.
"A dickhead albeit a calm and reasonable one." Thanks. Now grow up. As for the outraged remark well your reply just confirmed it. Calm down dude.
Just Another Sony shooter with a chip on their shoulder.
"best all around" presupposes something that is widely agreeable among many, which could also mean for nobody in particular e.g. cam with no charecter, yet still it's a catchy title, obviously. (:
My advise would be - follow your own path, find what is best for you, not easy or cheap mind you, but immensely more rewarding.
One word answer: No.
Reasons?
Let me think..?
20mp £2,500 for just the body alone..
You'd be better off with a top of the range micro 4/3rds body and a top quality brand lens or two, at the same price.
At least the lens adaptors will let you use your EF glass, which will be stabilised, even if the lens itself isn't, through IBIS.
Just think all your wonderful unstabilised Canon Prime lenses with image stabilisation.
The only lens my micro 4/3rds body struggles with is a 3rd party f2.8 zoom, which drained the batteries on my Canon bodies in the first place.
20mp tick
£2,500 = Top of the range body and a top specification lens or even two. As for adaptors mine cost just over £100 and even the auto focus works..
You might be better off with a m4/3, but I wouldn't. Nothing wrong with 4/3, but it doesn't give the results that I'm looking for. I went from APS-C to FF and won't go back. The only other direction I'd consider is medium format.
While I loved my GH5 for video, photos taken with my GH5 were always a disappointment. I bought the R6 and found the photo quality is a major step up from what I had with my GH5. The R6, like the GH5, has IBIS in body so those non stabilized EF lenses work fine :)
I have the Canon EOS 7D mk2, which is also 20mp. The main differences are better tracking focus on the 7D, but poorer contrast handling. The main subjects I photograph are plants with a rich yellow centre, a dazzling white inner ring and rich outer colours all with a velvety texture.
The 7D tends to blow out the white inner circle and fails to capture the entire flower head in focus it struggles with the contrasts. The M4/3 handles the contrasts better and gets more of the flower head in focus.
There is no such thing as a best all round camera, although 20mp looks like the closer solution.
Full frame would give different results but even then wouldn't be perfection with too shallow a depth of field for the lighting at the indoor shows my flower subjects are shown in..
Not sure that price point is mass market worth (likely sub $1,000 price point these days). The Nikon Z6ii has similar features at $500 less.
The Olympus em1 mkii is/was being offered brand new at £1,099 with a free fast wide apperture 'pro' lens.
£2,500 is launch price for the R6, it's like a newly launched car, by the time the R6 mkii is launched, with precious little update, apart from probably some firmware, the R6 will have dropped in price, but it may never deliver as much bang for your buck as the em1 mkii offer.
20 mpx is not enough...
I have strong feeling that the two RF super telephonto lenses are just the EF versions with built-in adaptors!