Quoted By:
okay, /pee/, it's time to face up to the tough questions:
>R6 vs R5?
>24-105 non-L vs 24-105 L?
>which budget prime, 35/1.8, 50/1.8 or 85/2?
>RF 100-500L vs EF 100-400L II?
IMO, R6 makes a lot more sense unless you need the extra reach for cropping and gigantic prints.
24-105 L vs non-L, I'm still split about. I own both and I can hold the camera with non-L version all day long. The 24-105L is heavy enough that my bitch wrists begin to fatigue after only a few minutes, basically necessitating that I use a camera strap and hold the camera with two hands. It's brighter and has weather sealing, but man, that compact size of the non-L is really appealing. I was going to sell the non-L when I got the L, but now I think I might keep both.
For me, I need the RF 50m f/1.8 because it's the smallest native lens, but I might need one of the others as well.
Tele zoom will be my next purchase, just not sure which one to get. My gut says EF100-400L II, but my head says RF100-500L
