[R6 Mk2 + kit 24-105mm f4-7.1 IS STM] OR [R8 + RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM]

[oirampok]

Hello fellow photographers,

I've started shooting with a Canon 1200d with a kit lens back in 2013, and the upgraded to an 80D, a 50mm 1.8 and a 18-135mm kit lens since 2017, finally saved up enough to upgrade to my first full frame. I'm going on a trip to Thailand and Indonesia with some friends this December, what better way to get acquainted with my new camera that a trip.

In terms of skill level i'm not a beginner by any means but definitely still far from a professional. Mostly shoot for me to post/prints to hang up at home: https://www.instagram.com/mariosebastian13/?hl=en As for what I shoot, I shoot everything, portraits, cars, landscapes, nature, urban, etc. I've narrowed what I wanted to:

- A full frame generalist mirorless canon body

- A decent walkaround zoom lens

- Another nifty fifty for portraits, products and other low aperture shots

I have to budget to get a R6 Mk2 with the kit 24-105mm f4-7.1 IS STM lens, or i can get an R8 with the RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. Not really interested in the R6 because its an older sensor with only 20 MP, since i tend to crop a lot in post.

The only thing stopping me from going with the R8 is the lack of in body stabilisation, I was thinking if i get the R6 i can ditch having to carry tripods entirely on my trips for those sunset/sunrise exposures (1-2 seconds). What do you all think I should get? Will it even be worth it to upgrade from the 80D to the R6 Mk2/R8? I was thingking since mirorless is the future may as well buy now instead of investing in EF lenses that may someday become obsolete. Someone suggested to me that I should instead get a sigma 24-105 lens, but idk if using the adaptor will degrade the autofocus performance or not? 

[johnrmoyer]

Either the R6 II or the R8 would have better low light ability than a crop sensor, but the RF-S lenses are less expensive than the RF lenses.

Have you considered the EOS R7 with an adapter to continue using the lenses that you already have. I still use my EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM with my EOS R5 for focus stacking and it works even better on the R5 than on the 80D. It has only a few less pixels on an EOS R5 than on my EOS 80D, but would be severely cropped on an EOS R8.

[oirampok]

Definitely considered that, but i'm planning on giving away my 80D along with the kit lens and 50mm to my sister, and I really want to try a full frame. 

[deebatman316]

Is low light a concern of yours. If so you may face problems with the camera not locking focus in low light. Due to the variable aperture lens. F/4-7.1 is slow for low light photography. Also are you doing flash photography. The R7 & all Full Frame bodies DO NOT have a built in flash. 3rd Party lenses are hit and miss when it comes to compatibility. Only Canon can guarantee compatibly with their products. Also not all EF lenses support all features on RF Mount cameras. How much cropping are you doing. The R5 would be a better choice if you're cropping a lot. Since that camera has a 45 megapixel sensor. Also the camera has the AF system. All the adapter does is make the lens sit at the correct distance from the image sensor. The adapter doesn't change how the lens will AF. For portraits 85mm is used on Full Frame. On APS-C 50mm can be used due to the image sensor's crop factor of 1.6x. With Full Frame your lenses will appear shorter than they were on APS-C.

[oirampok]

I cant afford an R5, its pretty overkill for a hobbyist like me i think.

[deebatman316]

Is low light photography in your needs. The variable aperture lens will cause the camera not to lock focus in low light. Also is flash photography something you will be doing.

[oirampok]

No flash, definite low light photography, as I mostly do all my photography as I travel, i will be shooting all sorts of scenes in all sorts of light conditions, hence why im looking for an all rounder. I often hear advice that better glass > better body, hence why i was thingking of getting the R8 + the L lens, but that in body stabilization might make a difference for the r6.

[deebatman316]

Canon does have a kit with the R6 Mark II and 24-105mm F/4L IS USM lens. If you want lens IS and IBIS.

[oirampok]

Okok, heres two scenarios/use cases that I often find myself in when travelling: 

Its around 5 am sunrise time on top of a mountain, I have no tripod, I am trying to photograph:
- the sunrise on the mountains [Low light, low shutter, lanscape, 24mm]
- some mountain goats in the distance [Low light, low shutter, telephoto, 80-105mm] 

I'm on a train, trying to take pictures of the changing landscape, but again there are some interesting goats that show up and i end up zooming in. I am trying to photograph:
- the landscapes [Good light, High shutter, lanscape, 24mm]
- some mountain goats in the distance [Good light,High shutter, telephoto, 80-105mm] 

Which one do you think will perform better?:
- R6 Mk2 + kit 24-105mm f4-7.1 IS STM (Double Image Stabilitzation, but lower aperture and sharpness)

OR

- R8 + RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (Only Lens Image Stabilitzation, but higher aperture and sharpness)

Should I prioritize L glass with the objectively weaker R8 body, or get the more expensive R6 mk2 body and less quality glass? I cant afford the R6 and the L lens, if i could i would have already bought that. 

[deebatman316]

The lens and body combo matters. Some camera bodies and lens combos can provide up to 8 stops of stabilization. I'm not sure how much the 24-105mm F/4 & 24-105 F/4-7.1 provide on the R6 Mark II. Just know that some features you may want such as better battery won't be available in the R8. Also the slower and laggy EVF in the R8. The 24-105mm STM will be the limitation due to the slower aperture.