>>4364623>RP w/ RF 24-105mmBasically a one stop shop for a great, cheap, lightweight, Full-Frame quality kit. You may never need to buy another camera or lens, and it's cheap as fuck. You may want a telephoto lens as well. The sensor is slightly dated with slightly lower DR than current Canon models.
>A7III w/ FE 28-70mmWould fill a very similar role with a more limited focal range. You will likely want a telephoto lens at some point. I am not a huge fan of Snoy though personally.
>R8 w/ RF 24-50mmBasically a straight upgrade on the RP with better fps, video, and controls. The 24-50mm lens is pathetic so you will absolutely want to sell that for $100 on ebay and pick up either the 24-105mm or the 24-240mm.
>Nikon Z5 w/ 24-200mmNikon mirrorless is allegedly kind of piss poor compared to Canon/Sony, but if you wanted a Nikon this is it. Autofocus is generally not up to scratch and DR is said to be subpar to its competetors.
>R6 MkII w/ 24-105mmThis is where I would stop. This is your creme-da-la-creme. Currently regarded as the best mirrorless camera you can buy that isn't a full professional austismo model. If you buy this you will use it for a decade. All the pro features like IBIS and dual card slots like the R5, just with a lower MP count and fps. That MP count is not as important as you think on the R5 unless you're doing wildly heavy cropping in post. Spending the extra 2300 Euros on an R5 seems autistic.
>would you recommend apsc if budget is 1-2k (lense included)?Yes. Depending on the use-case. I am committing to an APS-C kit instead of going full frame since most of my photography is in good lighting, or macro where the extra crop factor is actually beneficial. If you are doing a lot of high-quality portraits and landscapes, I would recommend a Full Frame like the R8 or RP, but keep in mind APS-C is not suddenly dog-shit for those either. Full Frame will always cost more money, be physically bigger, and weigh much more.
Tl;dr buy RP w/ 24-105mm.
