5dmkii, 90d, RP or something else?

duckster wrote in post #19052785
Landscape and travel, I would look at the RP as it is smaller and lighter

Then rather a X-T3

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19053696
Within that budget, I suggest a used 5D Mark 4. I always get far more value for my dollar buying used ... [Snip] ... Warranties don't matter because nothing ever goes wrong with cameras within a warranty period, anyway.

Yeah. This ^^^^^

Having used the 5D2 and owning a 5D3, I like the Mk 3 a whole lot more and would consider it a decent step up. The Mk 4 is better and especially for video features. For me, the step from Mk 3 to Mk 4 isn't enough to tempt me into spending more money, but 2 to 4 probably would.

However...

-nicknack- wrote in post #19052759
... I find I really enjoy landscape and street the most (I travel a lot). That said I'm also getting into vlogging ...

Other than landscape, those choices really seem to favor a smaller rig. There are certainly advocates of using a large rig for vlogging. (Think: Peter McKinnon who uses a 1D as the "perfect" vlogging setup. Great images? Yes. Heavy? Yes!) But things like street? Inconspicuous/small. Travel? Lightweight. Vlogging? Lightweight.

If I'm driving to a landscape destination, I'll generally carry the big stuff. But if an airplane is involved (and sometimes even not), I'm probably taking my M5 with an EF to EFM adapter. Most cameras can capture great pictures. Even crop sensors. Being careful to not underexpose and using careful techniques can still give you good pictures. I know that it's "shameful" to say that I'm using an M5 when I have my 5D available, or standing next to someone with an A7R4. But I'm caring less and less about that and just enjoying capturing images like these...

Hi nicknack,

-nicknack- wrote in post #19052759
Hey guys,

So about a decade ago I managed to get my hands on a 5d Mark II. Spent a couple years using the crap out of it, then life happened and photography fell to the wayside. Within the last year or so I've really gotten back into it. That said, I'm also to some degree noticing the age of the camera technology wise (autofocus, video capabilities, flipable viewscreen, etc). Originally, the plan had been to grab some new lenses (as it stands I have a Nifty Fifty and the 24-105mm kit lens that came with the camera), but the more I've been using it and reading about newer camera's, I've been feeling pulled a bit towards putting that money into a new body and going for lenses down the line. Budget wise, looking at somewhere between $1200-1500. I’ve had people suggest the 90d and the RP. But I’m having trouble getting a good gauge on whether stepping down to a new crop sensor is better than staying with an old full-frame or not as far as image quality and such goes (I’ve never owned an aps-c before to have a good basis for comparison).

As far as the photography I enjoy, I'm definitely still expanding, but I find I really enjoy landscape and street the most (I travel a lot). That said I'm also getting into vlogging and would love something that I can use to make short films if I ever get to that point. I also plan to try my hand at portraits, because that also interests me quite a bit.

Anyway yeah, I really appreciate any input!

Been in the same position, effectively, but with more glass .

One thing I would like to say is that if you really liked the OVF of the 5D II, you will hate the tunnel vision ANY APS-C body provides.

After going for the 5D first about 6 months after the 5D II came out, I effectively stopped using any of my APS-C bodies because of the viewfinder differences. And 6 months thereafter again I got myself a 5D II.

-nicknack- wrote in post #19052819
So in doing some more research, I've found a new EOS R on sale from a well reviewed seller on Ebay (gag) for $1400, which is in my price range. With that in mind, do you think that would be worth considering over the lower price point on the RP or sticking with the 5dmkii (in regard to the disadvantages you mentioned and such)?

I was actually going to suggest something like that, going for EOS R rather than EOS RP, for several reasons.
One is that the RP is very small, and not comfortable to me because I have to hold my pinky underneath the body. The EOS-R has a great grip, is much smaller than the 5D II, and still very comfortable to hold.
Secondly, personally I'd want more resolution because of the type of shooting I do, and printing large prints. It is easier with the EOS R therefore.
Another is batteries: the old batteries of the 5D II fit the EOS-R, not the RP, and the latter one's battery is very small, and doesn't last very long.

-nicknack- wrote in post #19052794
That's kind of where I'm standing and why I'm so torn. I do really like the idea of improved focusing and better iso (a lot of my everyday photography tends to be of my dogs, which always turn out somewhat blurry or noisy), so that's probably my biggest pull for a new body in general. I'm not necessarily looking to get bowled over by better image quality, as I know under the right conditions my photos have been awesome, its just hard to always get those conditions on the fly.

I am open to mirrorless. I do feel like a lot of people gravitate toward them right now because its trendy, so I do feel like I take their reviews with more of a grain of salt, but I don't have anything against going in that direction for the right reason. I've had a few people suggest them for the light and small route, but honestly in that regard it doesn't make a difference to me. The 5d is big, but its also the only thing I've ever known so I'm used to the big and bulky. If I may ask, what are your personal reservations on mirrorless aside from the viewfinder? Honestly the lack of viewfinder wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me, I wear glasses, and the ability to use the screen more would be kind of nice with that in mind, but its not really a deal maker or breaker on that.

The EOS R line has way better AF than the 5D II. Basically, it is so good that if you don't nail focus, IMO it is user error. With the 5D II I got about 60-70% of shots in focus, with the EOS R it is close on 100% of where I wanted it to focus. Absolutely and stunningly amazing, even at the edges of the frame.

-nicknack- wrote in post #19052861
My biggest issue with the 5D2 is with the autofocus and to some extent the ISO. I feel this the most when I'm trying to shoot something that needs to be taken quickly. Whether its something on the street, or I'm walking through a forest and see a really great shot. As far as video (and I'm very new to the video side so this may just be my own inexperience), if I'm moving the camera much at all or the subject changes distance from the camera, things get very frustrating very quickly.

This will certainly be solved by almost any modern camera. The only problem with the current range of EOS R -series cameras is th ecrop factor, althought that can be overcome more or less by using APS-C lenses (EF-S) if you so like. I am not a video shooter myself, so I do not care a lot about that, and whenever I get to that point, I will see what to do next .

If you really like/liked the 5D II, like I did, I'd suggest you opt for the EOS R if you can find an affordable one, even used. Absolutely great camera, and a joy to use.
Also, with the adapter (which is always provided with the body over here), you can stil luse your old EF glass, and I can assure you that it works as well or even better than on the 5D II. My old 85L II and 50 F/1.2L focused faster and better with adapter on the EOS R than they ever did on the 5D II. Same holds true for the 100-400L and L II. Teh rest is much of a muchness, as I speak just from experience rather than using a stopwatch. What is nice for MF lenses (of which I have a few) is the focusing options you have available with the EOS R - makes it a lot easier than ever before on the 5D II. And focusing is really very, very precise.

I even bought the battery grip after a while, and it is the first time ever I feel comfortable with a camera with battery grip. I have had battery grips for several of my bodies, incuding the 5D II, and had the 1D Mk III as well, but I could not get used to these setups - very clunky and uncomfortable to me, and way too heavy. Not so with the EOS R, and in addition, you get a charge adapter to charge the batteries while in the battery grip - very convenient.

Actually, I regularly hold the EOS R with RF 85L with one hand, no problem - something I never could manage with the 5D II and EF 85L, and that is both without batterygrip. The ergonomics of the EOS R body are IMO just superb.

Finally, lenses.
Basically, all lenses manufactured by Canon for the RF mount are stuning lenses compared to their EF variants. I got the body first, just to see how I liked it, and next, for a specific shoot, I then got the RF 24-105L, I have owned teh EF versions, and never liked them, basically because of their lacklustre performance in difficult light conditions, at least the copies I tried and owned. The RF version made me actually wow. As a result I got a few more RF lenses, basically to replace some of my most used stuff (50L and 85L), and for fun the RF 35 Macro. Not looking back at all. Especially the Ls were expensive, but worth it.

I got the abovementioned battery grip after I got the RF 85L, and especially for reportage style shooting it is absolutely great, it makes it actually very comfortable to hold. It was good without, even sigle handed use, for me anyway (was with EF 85L II on 5D II too, be it two-handed), but now it is even comfortable.

In short, if you want to upgrade, I'd sincerely suggest you go Canon mirrorless, ideally EOS R, but if the budget does not allow that, than yes, go for the RP, preferably with that extra little handgrip available for it, as it just adds that extra cm to hold it more comfortably (I tried).

I was originally planning to go for the RP myself, but a good friend of mine, who happens to be a retaile rin teh phot industry, who knows me very well, asked very rightfully whether I would be really happy with the RP and why, knowing that I am a perfectionist, and wanted more resolution as well, plus enough battery life. I realised he was right, so saved just a little longer. I am really happy I follwed his advice.

BTW, the RF lenses fortunately did not cost me anything, basically because I traded in a lot of other lenses (EF 50L, EF 85L, and a bunch of MFT lenses I never really used) . I did buy the batterygrip with real cash, however, but that was some time later .

If you'd like some cheaper but very decent aftermarket lenses, I'd suggest you could consider the Samyang / Rokinon RF and EF lenses - they work very well woth the EOS R too .

Anyway, HTH, kind regards, Wim

I say you are a candidate for the Fuji X-T4, slightly out of your budget but it’ll last you a long time for lifestyle photography/ videography. 4K 60 gives gives you plenty of room to grow into, and the stills features and selection exceeds the 90D.