Still having not much luck finding a D500, but how does the R7 compare to it?

Canon seems to have lots of budget friendly bodies that have lots of high end tech installed in them.    If I end up pulling the trigger on a refurb R7 from Canon, what is the cheapest 70-200 f/2.8 I can get in to?    I like the Tamron G2, but wld and older Canon 70-200 be a better way to go?

I simply find the Canon lineup confusing compared to Nikon.    ??

Check some real hands-on reviews of the R7 vs R8.

 While the 8 seems to be lacking in features it shines in image quality...all down to what you really need/ want.

Either will take EF lenses with the adapter, and prices seem to be softening on L series EF glass.

I have an R7. It does okay outdoors, for wild life and landscapes. It's shit in doors, or in dimly lit situations. And I wasn't happy with the eclipse shots I got with it. I'm considering selling it, but just not sure yet. My R6mkII is head and shoulders better.

There have been reports that the third party adapted lenses from Tamron amd Sigma don't work as well. Some say they work just as well. I had the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 for about a week before I returned it. Was just too heavy and too long with the EF-RF adapter and the focusing didn't work as well.

The Canon RF glass is best in class on their mirrorless cameras. You can find the RF 70-200 f2.8 on the Canon refurb site pretty regularly. But it's still around $2200. Best price I saw was $1400 on black Friday.

In the same price range, I'd seriously look at the R8, which is full frame. Though it lacks IBIS and weather sealing like the R7 and R6.

Maybe look at a refurbished R6 first gen which is getting to be pretty cheap these days.

ETA: the adapted Canon EF lenses seem to work fine. Though the optics may not be as good as the newer RF stuff.

Nikon Z8, problem solved. Able to use all those Nikon lenses you already have!

Appreciate the comments/feedback.

I have figured out for how I like to shoot, the 70-200 lens is what I like.    I like the images my Sigma 120-300 will produce, but it is gawd awful heavy and I hate using a monopod.  It's simply not a fun lens for me, and this is suppose to be a fun hobby for me.

So, I'm back to my 70-200 and my current bodies, which are D780 and D3s.    The D3s I really like, as it shoots fast and just feels right in the hands, but the image quality is a step back from the D780.......the D780 really is a superb camera.

Anyway, as I've alluded (not sure if that's a word) to, I keep coming back to a crop sensor and the extra reach it offers (our high school gym/football field lighting is now greatly improved).   I don't need the  high ISO performance the D780 has, so I keep looking at a D500, but it's an almost 10 year old design now.  

I'm ok shooting with older gear, but am surprised how much the D500 still brings.    Maybe it really is "that" good.   Am sure it is.    And as a previous poster suggested, get a Z8.      Yep, that really would be an awesome camera, and I've looked at it, but I shoot for fun and give my pics to the coaches for the kids, and using a $3000+ camera for volunteer work really doesn't make much sense to me.  

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Canon just seems to put more options out there, at a cheaper price than Nikon.   I look at the R7/R8 and can't find anything in Nikon's lineup that comes close for the price.  

Probably shd just stick with what I have and be happy and (keep) working on technique and results.    Thanks for the ear.

Have you considered some of the micro 4/3rds offerings? Lightweight body and lens combo, 2x crop over full frame. If you are not overly concerned about low light, then a 20mb micro 4/3rds rig might work.

What does your current gear not do for you that you are wanting to make a very expensive change to another camera system?

Not really.   I'm pretty comfortable with crop sensors and full frame cameras, and am concerned introducing another platform would smoke my brain.    lol

"All" I'm trying to do is get more reach, keep the weight down,  and if possible, a little faster shutter fps.    That's why I'm looking at a crop sensor, and I do like Nikon and am comfortable with Nikon, but it seems their only high end offering is the D500, and that camera albeit capable, is still almost 10 years old.

Crop sensor camera on my Tamron 70-200mm G2 would give me 300mm and I'd stay light weight.    I do like my Sigmas 120-300mm f/2.8 since the images it can produce are excellent, but it is HEAVY and simply don't want to lug it around much anymore.

Realistically, cropping a full frame image is going to be the same quality as having a crop sensor camera.

You could get into specs, resolutions, noise, etc. but practically it doesn’t really matter with modern cameras.

I guess I can relate to this, as my D780 has a fairly large sensor and I crop most all the time, anyway.

Probably should just try and learn more about my D780 and photography in general and quit looking for the next shiny camera body.    lol

R7 is awesome, I love it as back up to my R5
R7 and EF100-400mk2
Galveston 2023 by Chris B, on Flickr

Galveston 2023 by Chris B, on Flickr

You’re looking at dropping at least $3k to get into a Canon R8 and an RF 70-200. Closer to $4k if you buy new.

Can’t fault anybody for buying gear for the sake of buying gear because who doesn’t like new gear lol?

Logically is it going to be $4k better than what you are doing right now?

You’re not wrong. Canon has way more options in the Mirrorless world than Nikon. Nikon is trailing Canon/Sony and Panasonic at a distant fourth place. Only their very high end camera can compete with the speed, resolution and auto focus that Canon and Sony have.

The price and features that Canon offers in the entry and mid level cameras can’t be touched by anyone, except that the R7 is their highest speced APSC camera. They really do need a more professional level APSC camera. But those pro shooters are also almost exclusively shooting on full frame cameras. And their crop frame lenses are a bit lacking. But later this year Sigma and Tamron have announced that they will both start selling RF crop frame lenses, so there should be some options opening up soon.

I still think you should look seriously at getting a refurbed R6/R6mkII, or R8.

R8 on sale at B&H right now $1199

If you compare the size of an old 7d vs an r6, the r6 is smaller and lighter while being full frame. Honestly it was really a surprise when canon even produced new mirrorless with apsc sensors as you already get a huge benefit of size reduction and complication with the mirrorless design. So that means the apsc sensor is just there to lower the price point. To me it wouldn’t make sense to devote much into anything more pro than the r7, except an update. The next logical step in the upgrade line if you have an r7 is a r7.2 or the r6 or r5, not much room for anything more pro that would be beneficial with a apsc sensor.  

But yeah if the op can afford more camera the r6 is the next one I’d look at beyond the r7/r8

R6 MKII here. I have Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM lens I bought used at mpb.com. using the ef rf adaptor. It is a great combo. With IBIS and lens stabilization it.is awesome.

Not sure about 3rd party lenses.

For what you want, consider a mirrorless camera, with lens adapters for your existing lenses.
I bought a Canon M5 (early adopter, before the release of the R series) and use the lens adapter for my L series lenses on it. Then, when they discontinued that line, I picked up a mint used M5 body as a backup.
I also went to Olympus Micro4thirds (OMD EM-1ii and a PEN-F) which have a better focus lock in challenging light than the M5 (school plays, etc. with stage lighting).
Newer Canon models apparently have better low-light performance, but nothing is going to beat a crop-sensor DSLR for pounding out frames. I do fall back on a EOS 7D for those kinds of chores, as my 50D is showing its age (and shutter count).