Mike_5D Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
bman212121 wrote:
Keeping size and cost down either choice would help for that versus having two systems you have now. I'm just thinking of the most basic scenarios and it seems like the difference between the two ends up being even smaller than it seems. If you use the GH3 primarily stand alone with a small prime lens then I can see that as being the most portable solution. If you're going to pair the R10 with an RF lens you already own, you will likely be trading off some of the weight by having heavier lens than you would have on MFT. If you're going out with both cameras, right now you probably go out with 3 or more lens, where you could go out with say a prime and a telephoto and swap back and forth as needed. But space in the bag you'll be throwing in an extra battery and charger specific to the R10 you might not need with an R7. You probably also need to buy a spare battery or two, so that adds some additional cost if you already have everything you need from your R6....Show more →
There are definitely lots of factors to consider. With Canon's FF offerings shrinking in size and Panasonic's gaining weight in the generations since the GH3, the size and weight gaps have narrowed considerably since I got the GH3 about 3 years ago. The R7 shares the battery with the R6 which is a big plus. They can share the same lenses, but with a crop factor. I was really hoping the R7 would have the same control layout as the R6. But since that's not an option short of buying another R6, I'm wondering if I should just save the cash on the R7 and get the smaller R10 instead. But then as you note, I'd need at least one more R10 battery and possibly an RF-S lens to regain some of the wider focal lengths. The RP solves the crop issue, but still uses a different battery, has a different control layout, and can't AF well in 4K.
|