>>4179680For stills it's absolutely fine. Its one flaw is it has the worst dynamic range of shipping FF bodies. But it's also not difficult to shoot/blend two photos for high DR, even hand held. Conversely it actually has decent high ISO. For video it's only good if you don't mind being stuck at 1080p. The 4k mode is cropped with no AF.
I'd have no issues recommending one to someone on a budget.
>>4179705You can adapt them to the RP but not the 6D II. (Technically you can adapt them to the 6D II, but no infinity focus.)
>>4179778>The high ISO performance is so bad it’s like buying a used DSLRProvably false statement. picrel
>but the lenses cost twice as much or require an adapter that makes it actually as large as said DSLR.The adapter does not make it as large as a DSLR. FF mirrorless lenses are already as large or larger than their DSLR counterparts with the only real size/weight savings in the body, and the RP is one of the smallest bodies. The adapter is a feather, and there are a ton of used EF lenses to choose from.
>When in doubt, look at nikon and panasonic’s offerings. Nikon = better stills for cheap. Panasonic = better video for cheap.Refurbished the RP is $900 with full warranty. Used it's down to $600-$700. Which Nikon or Panasonic beat it at those price points?
