Upgrade recommendations from EOS R50

[Camren_Line]

I have an EOS R50 and I do a lot of wildlife photography and soon I'm thinking of upgrading to a better camera like an EOS R7 but I would like some recommendations I have an RF 100-400mm f5.6-8 is USM, an RF 55-210mm f5-7.1 is STM and an RF 18-45mm f4.5-6.3 is STM, and am thinking of getting a loawa 90mm f2.8 2x macro lens but I would also like some recommendations on some macro lenses around $500 because I am not completely set on the loawa

[March411]

Strictly a personal opinion.

I owned the R50 and traded it in for the R7, I made a mistake!

While the R7 IBIS was the leading factor for trading the R50 I believed shooting macro the results I get from the R7 have been disappointing, the R50 performed better. I keep trying the R7 with multiple settings but overall I would say again I was mistaken.

The phrase most spoken about the R7, it's a decent camera but..... You can fill in the blank once you do the research because there are several. Low light focus hunting, lens compatibility and soft focus are the most common. 

Current price on a new R7 is around $1550 but deals can be found if you look. My recommendation but be to take a step up to the R6 MkII which is about $2100, deals can also be found with some research. I used the R6 MkII for quite a while and it would be difficult to give it a bad review and it's low light performance is brilliant. 

The R6 Mk II performs much better in low light, the AF is faster and much more sticky. Personally if you are looking for a body that is not a new release and have a tight budget this would be the only body I would recommend that comes close to the R7 price point. Buy once and be happy with your decision. 

I own and have owned many Canon bodies and I can say out of all of them the R7 is one camera I would not give an endorsement. Again these are opinions based on the bodies I have used both past and present.

Hold onto the R50, save a little more and pick up a much better body. Also, your RF-S lenses will not work on the R6 MkII unless you change the crop factor but you could trade those for the upgrade or a macro lens.

[ebiggs1]

I would add as the number gets smaller I.E., 7, 6, 5 and finally 1, a Canon camera gets 'more' better. So it is not surprising that a R6 is 'better' than a R7.  And a R5 is better than a R6. (models may have a new Mk ?)

If you just want a new camera, I understand totally 😁, go buy the R7 and it will do stuff better as long as you need that feature. But if you are looking at how will it improve your photography then you will have to sit down and figure out if what it offers will help. You have to make these types of decisions not us.

[TomRamsey]

I photograph wildlife also and chose the RF200-800 lens BEFORE I chose a camera, at the time I had no Canon gear.  I did tons of research and the R7 and R6 Mk2 were contenders that fit my budget.  Basically, the R6 Mk2 won out because of the low light ability that the full frame 24MP sensor enables.  It also has a little better autofocus among other advantages.  And, no, you do not get more reach in anAPS-C camera, you just get a smaller frame which makes an un-cropped photo look larger. 400mm is 400mm.  

I am very happy with my decision and highly recommend the R6 Mk2.  But I do recommend going with the newest technology that meets your specs.  Marc has already stated his opinion based on his experience.  His experienced comparison is very close to what my research showed.