peter_c5

Yes, you can skip an update. I’ve just updated my R5 from 1.5.0 to 1.5.2. I sometimes don’t update for some minor issue, like catering for a new lens I don’t and am unlikely to own.

I’ve just read the article in Canon News about these two new, incredibly expensive super teles. Apparently they’re pretty much EF lenses with inbuilt 2X converters, and the reported image quality is almost identical to what you’d get with the far cheaper EF lens plus EF 2X converter. Glad I’m not in the market for anything like these!

Why don’t you ask the guys at Lens Rentals? They do a series of body and lens stripdowns and frequently comment on the fancy screwdrivers required.

I agree with the recommendations of the EF-S 60 f2.8 macro above: a superb, sharp lens with an effective focal length of 96mm. Small and with excellent USM focusing, all it lacks is image stabilisation - and for that you’d need to 100mm L IS, which is far outside your price range, even used. I’ve had one for years.

Hi Mick! I’m on the same path as you, just quite a bit further on. I started my journey with the RP, and found it transformed my photography. Pin point autofocus, plus the ability to adjust exposure on the fly using the control mount adapter, as at that stage I had no RF mount lenses. I sold both my 6D Mark 2 and 70D, as for me the mirrorless experience was so much better. My wife still has her DSLR, an SL2, and when I use it very occasionally I often have to stop and think about what I want to do; I’d avoid a two system approach if I could. The RP has now been replaced by an R5, and I agree that - or the R6 - should be what you aim for. I wanted the higher MP, hence the R5. Looking at your lenses, we both have the 16-35 f4 L IS, which like all the EF lenses works flawlessly on the R mount. I gave my 24-105 to my son, as the RF version is clearly superior. However, the RF 24-240 is usually on my R5 as a walk around lens as there’s nothing in the EF line to match it, it’s remarkably good (if less so at the 24 end) and reasonably priced, too. I think you’d find the RF 70-200 f4 smaller, lighter and sharper than your EF version. So, I’d go for the body and then gradually replace your EF lenses if there seemed some real advantage: size and weight, or optical quality. Cheers - Peter

Are you trying to adjust a jog or raw image? The sliders don’t work with jpgs.

Lack of MFA was one of several reasons I sold my 60D to upgrade to a 70D, several years ago. That camera should be available secondhand now for less than a 7D and, if you prefer the smaller size and weight of your 60D have a look at it. Of course, the 80D and 90D would be better again - but at greater cost. However, I agree with paddler4 that it’d be worth checking that it’s not a lens issue.

Like John, I’ve found that my EF lenses work at least as well on my R mount cameras as they ever did on EF mount. However, I think that the real difference is that the RF lenses are more recent designs, often with better coatings and better focus systems (I’d exclude the new RF 50 1.8 from this - that seems pretty much the EF STM version in a new dress). My RF 24-105 L is clearly better than my old, but excellent, EF equivalent for example. Pity that it cost twice the price

I totally agree with all of you who’ve commented that what you’ll use a camera for, and personal preference, should ultimately matter most. Having said that, here’s an unequivocal vote for the R6: 1 It’s a much newer model, with the latest sensor and processor 2 Canon is clearly in the process of abandoning DSLRs for the RF mirrorless range 3 For birds and for people, the focus detection is streets ahead 4 Being able to see exactly the exposure you’ll get is also a plus 5 The fold-out screen is very useful 6 The EF-RF adapters give new life to all your EF and EF-S lenses. My son has a 5D4 and I have an R5 (and an RP and previously had a 6D2), and we’ve shared and exchanged lenses. However, I’m now a mirrorless convert. I’d note that your question was about the ‘best’. Right now, you should be able to pick up a top DSLR such as the 5D4 at a great price, while the R6 will be at full price.

I’ve had an RP since last Christmas, and I love it ❤️ It’s replaced both a 70D and a 6D2: so much smaller and lighter, and being able to preview the shot’s exposure on screen is brilliant. The Control Ring EF-RF adapter works perfectly with all my EF glass. I’ve not used it for super low light shots, which you want to do, but because the mirrorless screen shows what you’ll get in darker situations, it should work pretty well for you. As a travel camera with the RF 24-240 lens it’s a brilliant combination. Don’t take too much notice of all the pixel peepers who rubbish this lens: I did a series of test shots against a whole set of other lenses, including both the EF and RF 24-105s, and apart from the corners between 24 and about 35, it’s almost impossible to pick the difference.

I have one, and I love it. I had a 6D2 and a 70D, and while the 70D was with me for years and served me well, the 6D2 just didn’t do it for me, so I sold it. Then I saw the RP for sale in Australia for A$1000 (=US$700 or so) and snapped it up, along with an EF-RF converter. With the RP I have many more keepers, thanks to the WYSWYG EVF. I can set a focus point almost anywhere and adjust exposure on the fly. If the scene is dark, I can actually see what I’m doing visually. The EF-RF converter works seamlessly with all my EF lenses. And the body itself is so much smaller and lighter. Of course, the R5 looks wonderful - as does it’s price! No doubt I’ll end up with one, and then the RP will be my backup camera.

I bought one last Christmas and am delighted with it. It replaced both a 6D2 and a 70D. Image quality is obviously almost identical to the 62, as it shares the same sensor, but I’m finding the mirrorless viewfinder with its exact preview of what I’ll get most useful, and I really appreciate the smaller size and weight. The EF-RF control ring works perfectly with all my EF lenses, but with EF-S lenses the much smaller megapixel count is all too apparent. Overall, I couldn’t be happier.

Looking at the discussion on the Canon EOS forum, it seems to have almost died over the last few months. By contrast, there have been many, many postings on the Fred Miranda Canon Gear forum. Is that all we need, or should we start a new forum here too? Unsurprisingly, I’m posting this as someone who’s just moved over to Canon RF mirrorless - and have just sold my last Canon DSLR.

This is exactly the problem I’ve just had! Not only did DPP4 not work properly, several other programs didn’t either - including the latest HP software I use for my (non photo) printing and scanning. I had to get Apple to reinstall the previous OS. I guess we’ll all have to wait till everyone, including Canon, updates their software.

I’d strongly recommend the Canon EFS 15-85. It has a great focal length range (24-136 full frame equivalent), uses the superior USM focusing system, and has good IS. Very sharp, too. It’s a better lens than the 18-55 - but isn’t fast. You’ll need the expensive and heavy 17-55 2.8 if you want speed. Oh, and forget the much older 17-85. It’s much less sharp.

I have exactly this combination - 6D2 and 24-105 Mk 1 - and it’s fine. Not the sharpest lens ever made, but you know that. It’s a great walkaround and travel option.

I’d also keep the 24-105 but investigate your flash settings. However, I’m not sure why you’re even considering the 50 1.8 II. That’s a nasty plastic lens, now superseded by the 50 1.8 STM: a much better built, better performing lens only marginally more expensive.

As an Australian, just a word of warning: Australia is at least as big as the continental USA, so it takes a very long time to get to the more remote places. Only the eastern state capitals - Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne - are quite close to each other. Even the Great Barrier Reef in North Queensland will take a while to get to. But it's worth it! Do make sure you see some of the real outback, though, and don't just fly everywhere. I hope you really enjoy it all, and come back with some great photos

In the old days - before zooms became ubiquitous - the recommendation used to be to double your focal lengths. In your case that'd mean keeping your 10-18, approximately doubling that to the 24, then your 50, and finally the 100-400. But that ignores a whole lot of other important factors, such as which lenses you like most. And I'd have to agree with Sandy about finding out which lenses you've used most often. With a tiny body like your 100D surely size and weight are also important. That might rule out the 85 - but then it's a lovely lens! As a personal comment, I've often sold a lens I wasn't using only to regret it later! With such a great range of lenses, why not keep them and simply choose the one(s) most appropriate for whatever you're about to do?

Forget the 75 - 300. I had one, left over from film days, and it was hopelessly outclassed by newer lenses, especially soft at the long end. I'd go with Ken's suggestion of the 55 - 250 IS, which is great value for money.

<p>I suspect that, after so many years using Nikon, you'd find a switch to Canon not as easy (or as cheap) as you imagine. I used Olympus film cameras for 30 years before finally being converted to Canon DSLRs, and even now after ten years when I need to zoom or focus body memory still wants to turn the zoom or focus ring the wrong way (Olympus and Nikon zooming and focusing being the opposite way to Canon).</p> <p>If you're considering this seriously, why not rent some Canon gear for a couple of weeks and see how it suits?</p>

I found a cheap lens hood for a different lens would not fit backwards on it properly for storage, so I sent it back to B & H in exchange for the genuine Canon one. I was happy to pay the extra.

<p>The only advantage of the 10-18 is image stabilisation. Otherwise, it's an entry level lens, with a plastic mount and very small apertures - which I guess would be a problem in photographing interiors. The 10-22, which I own and use on APSC cameras, is much better built, with USM focusing and a metal mount. It's faster, and I think you'd find the longer zoom range very convenient. I know that it would overlap with your 18-200, but you'd rarely want wider than 22 (35mm equivalent 35mm) indoors, and so wouldn't be changing lenses all the time. Reviews of this lens have been uniformly positive.<br> Oh, and it's a great lens for landscapes, too!</p>

<p>I agree with Jan de B - shoot RAW as well as JPG. When I had that lens and camera combination I could get stunningly sharp photos (if I didn't mess up), but sometimes noticed colour fringing due to chromatic aberration. Processing the RAW image in Photoshop or DPP will fix that, if you ask the program to.</p>

<p>I've used the RC-6 for years - since 2010, in fact - and it's not needed a new battery yet. I've clipped it to the neck strap of each successive body it has been used with, and since it's so light I've always had it to hand. Why bother with anything else?</p>