>>3947067First, please space your posts better. Having a new paragraph for a new sentence is hell.
Anyway.....
>E-M1 Mk.IIIf your focus is photography, you now own Olympus' best sensor and phase detection (without any fancy algorithms). Oly kept the same sensor for the E-M1 Mk. III and the E-M1X. It's also present in the E-M5 Mk. III.
Unless you wanted video performance, I'd say keep this body and keep the MFT lenses. Their lightweight build and capable IBIS makes them perfect for being out and about.
>5D Mk.IIThis is a camera I've recommended to people on a tight budget before, but I ultimately think it's a camera from yesteryear which shouldn't be a reliable source of gathering information about what is the best for low light photography in the current year of our lord.
I'm surprised you haven't complained about how heavy and annoying it is to handle.
>R6I've looked into RF and its.... ecosystem. RF first and foremost has been made as a pro system. Canon knows it has tens of thousands of pro photographers using the 5D and the 1DX for their profession. From newspaper journalists photographing politicians to sports photographers capturing that goal someone scored, they're fucking everywhere.
For these pros, if they switch to RF, they want the same sorts of zooms and primes they've been relying on for years, decades even, with the new mirrorless body. That's why Canon prioritised the likes of the 70-200mm f/28 and the 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses. They're expensive as fuck, but pros can write off those costs as "expenses" and also don't pay sales tax.
The R6, R5 and now R3 all fit into the professional photographer's bag - they're not meant for hobbyists, even if Canon markets them that way.
>40-150mm f/2.8I have this lens, and I bought it for £800 from the gray market - Olympus seems to not care about the gray market, because no matter where you buy it from, no dealer ever fills in the warranty card...
It's a great lens, and I love it. Pic Rel is one I took with it.
