My last camera was a 40D...

My first proper camera was the Canon 40D which I absolutely loved and took some of my favourite photos.

Since that I had the following:

Canon 50D
Canon 60D
Canon 70d
Canon 6D
Canon 5D Mark III
Canon 5D Mark IV

Canon R6
Canon R7

I would recommend going with mirrorless and would highly recommend the R6 as a fantastic all rounder. The R7 is fantastic too and a good bit cheaper. You would be very happy I would imagine with either of these and you can use an adapter to use the old EF lenses which work as well on the mirrorless cameras if not better than on the DSLR. The EF lenses will be a lot cheaper than RF lenses.

The Canon 5D Mark IV was probably my favourite out of the lot of these cameras but once I had experienced a mirrorless camera and the ability to change settings and review my photos through the electronic view finder, I found using the 5D Mark IV felt a bit backward. However the 5D Mark IV is a work horse that produces beautiful photos.

I am only an amateur photographer so take my opinion with a pinch of salt.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19410026
If you want to start again with mirrorless, I'd look at the R, R7, or as mentioned, R6

Bang for buck R7 is pretty amazing.
R6 will lose resolution, but offer full frame angle of view.

If you are considering something more familiar, the 5D3, or 6D2 might be worth considering. If you can swing it, the 5D4 might just be the best all around DSLR ever made.

The nice thing about that difference is that even they're shooting the R6 in crop mode they'll have a better image than the 40D would have produced

I'll 3rd the 5D4 IF sticking with dslr, but since they're jumping back in at the tail end of the EF lifecycle that seems like a short path to spending on another upgrade. The cost of that, vs either the R7 or R6 just seems not a great value for someone that's basically resetting or joining anew.

Were you happy with the images from the 40D ? If so the R7 would be a very nice upgrade with better image quality than the 40D, an auto focus system that is way way way ahead for action and at a lower cost than an R6 or R5.

If however you want the best image quality a full frame R6 or R5 may be a better fit. Both have great image quality with the R5 having more resolution for large prints or heavy cropping. Both will excel at action work, insects and birds in flight.

RP and R not great for action.

Archibald wrote in post #19409993
Moot point now, but how did we get on the topic of lenses for the 5D4 and 5Ds?

Because you stated that old lenses would be wasted on new body resolutions, which isn't the case. Old lenses work just as well on current sensors as they have in the past, and even today, no FF mirrorless has the resolution of old DSLRs, other than the pixel density found on the R7 (APS-C).

Just about all EF lenses are old at this point, even discontinued. At this point, there seems to be only about 11 EF lenses still in production, mostly primes. However any of these made in the last decade, or even past that, work wonderfully with newer bodies. It is a hard sell to move to RF lenses other than maybe even faster AF, or newer focal lengths/apertures not offered in the EF lineup, but those come at a cost.

So in summary, old EF lenses (many at least) work great with the newer bodies, and in many cases better than they did on the DSLR.

almo wrote in post #19409991
I should mention that I would be starting off from nothing. I sold everything off years ago. I have no old glass laying around. No old cameras.

My subjects tended to be close up nature, still life, landscape, and some light action, mainly birds/insects in flight. I would like to have 4k video capability to cut in clips with my drone footage as well.

R7 for me for these needs and get R glass according to your needs....maybe a macro, a EF 100-400 or RF100-500 and a EF-24-70 F4 for landscape needs....should get you started

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19410077
Because you stated that old lenses would be wasted on new body resolutions, which isn't the case. Old lenses work just as well on current sensors as they have in the past, and even today, no FF mirrorless has the resolution of old DSLRs, other than the pixel density found on the R7 (APS-C).

Just about all EF lenses are old at this point, even discontinued. At this point, there seems to be only about 11 EF lenses still in production, mostly primes. However any of these made in the last decade, or even past that, work wonderfully with newer bodies. It is a hard sell to move to RF lenses other than maybe even faster AF, or newer focal lengths/apertures not offered in the EF lineup, but those come at a cost.

So in summary, old EF lenses (many at least) work great with the newer bodies, and in many cases better than they did on the DSLR.

OK, I concede.

But I'm puzzled. Why did Canon issue versions II and III for 2007-era popular L zooms?

Archibald wrote in post #19410110
OK, I concede.

But I'm puzzled. Why did Canon issue versions II and III for 2007-era popular L zooms?

A number of reasons, AF speed and accuracy, upgraded IS, better/newer firmware to accompany changes in newer bodies (thus why Canon started to offer lens firmware updates through the cameras), and in some cases better IQ, like the 100-400 II and 24-70 II. However the RF equivalents are maybe marginally better, in some cases not even, but come at a higher cost.

The 100-500 for example is maybe a bit better than the 100-400 II if you ask the right person, but its most likely allure is its size and extra 100mm. One has to decide if the $1000+ price difference is worth that or not. The money you save with EF over RF will often cover the cost of the R mount body you may want.

Seems a bit silly when one is to start from scratch, to invest in DSLR and EF lenses when the future is clearly mirrorless and everybody is switching.

The R6 or R7 would be huge upgrades from the 40D. Even the R10 would be, which is also a camera worth looking at if budget is restricted.

almo wrote in post #19409991
I should mention that I would be starting off from nothing. I sold everything off years ago. I have no old glass laying around. No old cameras.

My subjects tended to be close up nature, still life, landscape, and some light action, mainly birds/insects in flight. I would like to have 4k video capability to cut in clips with my drone footage as well.

A 5D4 would feel very familiar or a 7d2 if you’re on a budget ( really affordable used ) but if I was starting over I’d go mirrorless. When I got the R it took some getting used to, but as I used it more and more I now prefer it.

I would think to get started again something like an R7 with the kit zoom. Shoot and enjoy and see what else you may need.

There are a lot of affordable non L RF lenses like the 35 1.8, 85 or 100-400 that you add to your kit without spending a lot

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19410128
Seems a bit silly when one is to start from scratch, to invest in DSLR and EF lenses when the future is clearly mirrorless and everybody is switching.

The R6 or R7 would be huge upgrades from the 40D. Even the R10 would be, which is also a camera worth looking at if budget is restricted.

With the advent of the APS-C mirrorless bodies, those would appear to be great solutions. A downside is that there is no ultrawide RF-S yet. For now that gap could be plugged by the EFS 10-18mm and an adapter.

Lenses are just a cost item like anything else. They aren’t an investment because they aren’t likely to increase in value. On the other hand, given the future of EF lenses, they might go up in value, like LP records and FD lenses.

Archibald wrote in post #19410110
OK, I concede.

But I'm puzzled. Why did Canon issue versions II and III for 2007-era popular L zooms?

I think you were just being more granular in your reference to "old" lenses than the rest of us were in ours.

Hey guys, thanks for all the thoughts and advice here. And for the other interesting discussions that have branched off from my original question. It has been a great read!

That said...

I deeply appreciate all of the advice, and food for thought you guys have given me here. One major thing it has sort of made me think about is my shooting style, what subjects I really love to shoot, and what final images I am most happy with and proud of from my history of photography.

This caused me to reevaluate what I would actually be looking to shoot in the future, and how I want to go about it. So in the end I have decided not to go with the RP, or in fact a Canon camera at all. I have very fond memories of using my old Canon film cameras, and DSLRs, but going forward I think the bulk of these cameras, and focus on high tech and fast photography is not where I am at at this point in my life. I believe what I really want is to return, in a way, to a simpler time when I used an all manual camera.

Back in the day it was a Pentax ME Super, and in that vain I have decided to go with a Nikon Z fc because it is a nice cross between both modern and classic cameras, and I believe it will suit me quite well. It also fits nicely into my budget. I realize I didn't go into budget before, but my upper limit was about where the RP retails these days. I had no glass left from the old days as I sold everything off... twice. One of the main reasons for this choice was the fact that I have tried this in the fairly recent past. Buying an older, but familiar Canon DSLR and some L lenses, and then not feeling the desire to use them. I'm hoping that going down a simpler, slower, more contemplative path will help rekindle the love I originally had for this hobby.

Thanks again to everyone who replied!

Ah, yes a different direction all together. Nice choice. If you have not made the purchase yet, consider also the excellent Fuji X series line.

That's the great thing about starting fresh; there's a whole stable of solid options out there. Hopefully this one'll scratch the itch more effectively and let you get back for the shooting you enjoy!