Canon 80D or R100?

[komepne1]

Hi

I'm someone who already knows how to take good photos and worked with photography before, i'm interested in buying cameras again, at the moment i dont own any lenses, so i'll start from scratch.

my options are an 80D (used, with a 24mm) and a R100 brand new for the same price.

I'm not considering the R50 due to the weird hotshoe, and i cant afford the jump to R10

I can also find some very old fullframe dslr, but i'm not sure if i should go this route because of L lenses, but i can consider getting an 5D mark III + 28-135mm, i never used this specific lens, idk how it compares to the 18-135mm

Can someone share your thoughts?

[Tronhard]

Hi and welcome to the forum:
It is very difficult for us to know what to recommend without the following information:
1. What is your $budget?
2. What kinds of subjects you shoot
3. What conditions  you work with - dim light, outdoors etc. make a big difference to the gear

What is it about the R50 that you consider weird?

[Tronhard]

With respect Ernie, what I asked DOES matter.  We cannot provide suggestions for a budget that does not exist, and the more we know about what the OP wants to do the better we can focus on the right gear for them.

Certainly, I would recommend an R-series camera, but which one and what optics depends on the factors I outlined. 

[kvbarkley]

"Canon Multi-function accessory shoe •Optional Canon AD-E1 adapter required for conventional shoe-mount flashes and accessories"

If the OP does not have lenses, I assume he does not have flashes, so I don't know why it matters.

[Tronhard]

Hi Keith:
That was what perplexed me...   With no legacy gear to deal with, it appears we are starting off with a clean sheet, which is a big advantage.

[ebiggs1]

"...so i'll start from scratch."

None of the above post matters. The only thing that  does matter is "...i'll start from scratch.". Starting off you need to go R series whichever one you can afford it is the future and since you have nothing to bring along always go with current tech.

[shadowsports]

@komepne1,

Please if nothing more save your penny's and buy the R50 or R10.  I recommend against buying the R100.

The R50 is only a bit little more and is very much worth the additional cost.  

https://cameradecision.com/compare/Canon-EOS-R100-vs-Canon-EOS-R50

[kvbarkley]

His problem with the R50 is not the cost, but the Multi-Function Accessory Hot Shoe.

[Tronhard]

I think the consensus is that the way to go is to get an R-series body.

While I understand the OP's reservation about the hot shoe, since they don't (apparently) have a flash, unless they are going to spend a considerable time taking photos with a flash - in which case the features in the new units will be a benefit - then the much better functionality of the other R-series bodies is likely to be of far greater benefit. I don't see why that should outweigh the fact that the R100 is extremely limited: an old sensor from the EOS M series, less effective processor, less focusing and tracking, no flip screen, and very limited control options, and cheapest build compared to the others.  

For a comparison of the three APS-C cameras see this:

Of course, a ILC does not function without a lens, and it is important to consider that as an investment, good glass will arguably have a greater impact on image quality and represents the longer-term investment.  Here, some guidance is necessary: hence my questions about budget, subjects and conditions.

[LeeP]

The R100 is not "extremely limited" if the photographer is competent, but people may call it limited if (1) they are on the outside looking in having never used an R100 and/or (2) they believe that the camera "makes" the photographer. I bought an R100 as a backup body, but the more I use it the more I appreciate its basic-ness. It is very competent because I know what I am doing. I shoot with a wide range of cameras (film--35mm and medium format--and digital) and have done so professionally for 45 years.