Quoted By:
Hey bros. After learning for a while I know what I wanna shoot and I want a long range budget setup. I wanna buy new, keep it a decade and put a couple hundred thousand shots on it, also sales are coming up soon in aus and the used market's fucked anyway.
I have boiled down months of research to 2 cameras and 2 lenses, pic related.
Benefits of the panny is the dual IS but really that's negated by the narrower equivalent aperture and noisier sensor right? Benefits of the canon is obviously full frame quality which anyone with eyes can see. But I do like the grain of the G9 specifically. Just about every image out of that camera looks nice given there's enough light. Plus, it has full weather sealing and a 200mm longer equiv focal range and on top of that the whole setup's about $500 cheaper. But even with the older ff sensor I can tell the difference in images between the 2 cameras and I've looked at a lot of pics. The ef-to-rf system seems to work pretty much flawlessly and I'll have access to a lot of good cheap glass. Also, even though the 100-400 is f8 at the long end, it's still faster than the equiv f11 of the mft 100-300.
Leaning towards the canon to be honest. What do you guys think?
