squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?While the A7C (current version) doesn't have the greatest control layout, it doesn't seem too bad to meIFyou use the a lens that has a control ring. The main problem with the camera is that all the controls are operated with the thumb. If you get a lens with a physical aperture ring that allows you to set aperture with your second hand. If you shoot in aperture or manual mode then your thumb can set the other parameters.Sony has some nice lenses for use on a compact FF camera. The 28-60 that its often bundled gets good review and is truly compact for a FF zoom. There are other lenses like the 40 2.5 that would make a great compact all around prime. Also the body has IBIS so any lens is stabilized. The rangefinder format of there camera makes it less tall than a DSLR style camera and easier to pack.I don't have a R8 but do have a RP which is essentially the same camera outside the sensor and processing. Overall I'd rate it better than an A7c, but it does have shortcomings. No IBIS and not so great battery life are downsides. Otherwise its pretty good.The big difference is is Canon's lack of compact lens options if you want a truly compact setup. The new 24-50 is a step to address that, but its bigger than the Sony 28-60 and the closest thing to the Sony 40 2.5 is the Canon 50 1.8 but it's not stabilized. If you want something wider you have to go to the RF 35 1.8 IS . I have both of those lenses and overall they are fine. The 35 isn't really compact and the 50 has no IS and has a bit tight FOV for overall use (for me).To summarize, the Sony is better if you want a truly compact setup with a few really compact lenses. The Canon is a better camera overall if you'll also use it with larger lenses and don't need IBIS.

CamerEyes wrote:Agree on center of gravity being with the lens on my RP, which is similar to the dimensions of the R8.But at what price point, compared with other entry-level FF systems? The RF24-70mm and other stabilized lenses plus the cost of an R8 is likely not within the reach of first-time FF buyers.That's the problem with the RF mount in a nutshell.

CamerEyes wrote:MAC wrote:CamerEyes wrote:squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?I answered this question even before the R8 came out: For entry-level FF,the Sony A7C is still the body to beat,which is why I bought it and sold my RP. The RP and R8 both do not have IBIS, which is me is a major omission. Not least, the battery life from LP-E17 is a joke compared to what Sony uses in the A7C.The A7Cii will likely have IBIS as well. Canon needs to stop making IBIS a "premium feature" as well as come up with a better battery solution for smaller bodies.IBIS is a nice to have feature for a few of the primes that don't have IS, but with the Canon RF 24-105 F4 IS and RF 85 F2 IS glass I have (try investing in great RF glass btw - vs cheaper RF glass), this great RF glass i have already has IS, so it is no big dealThe A7C lacks a sufficient viewfinder, has a poorer focus acquisition spec of only -4 EV vs the R8's -6.5 EV -- btw that 2.5 stops is 2.5x2.5 = 6.25 times the amount of light needed to focus in low light. And the A7C only does 10 fps vs the R8's 20 fps and 40 fps. And the A7C has a higher price. And oops, what about the 29 min movie limitation of the A7C and where is the 4K 60p...So maybe for you who would continue to justify your purchase that occurred before the R8 was known, but no, for the majority, the A7C is no longer the small FF body to beat, the reviewers say the R8 is the small FF body to beat.In the first place, I have an R6Mii and an R7. So no, I don't need to justify my purchase of the A7C.good for uI am sharing my perspective of competitive entry-level FF cameras.which is different thanmajorreviewersIBIS is no longer nice to have.We could also say video recording more than 29 minutes is no longer a nice to have - look, you had to buy more bodies to get basic featuresWe could also say, spending more than $1500 for a body should get you more than 10 fpsEven Fuji's recent models have them.Fuji is heavy pricing to pay for APSC and heavy system for APSC for a system that lags behind in subject trackingThe lenses you mentioned are not within the price range of first FF camera buyers.The RF 85 F2 IS most certainly is, particularly during xmas pricingand three xmas's ago I got my RP + RF 24-105 F4L for $1700, less than the price you paid for your A7C.The RF16mm and the RF50mm lenses are very affordable to them, except that they don't have IBIS.if this affordability is the thing, then these 2 lenses are not the reason to get FF.  One is better off with APSCAnd you exaggerated the focus acquisition spec to justify your preference of the R8,you exaggerate one reason out of several I gaveand yes, R8 is still better focusing in low light, which becomes an issue with slower glassa camera you do not own,An R8 camera that I have pre-ordered, after using more than 15 Canon bodies over two decades, and has beenwidely reviewed by major reviewershave not used versus my A7C with which I have taken hundreds of photos by now using five different lenses.hundreds?  well I guess that is what happens with limited use and only 10fpsI've taken more than a million shots in more than 2 decades, and prefer to take advice from major reviewersYour armchair critiquing is getting old.What gets old is you claiming I have little experienceActually it appears I have more investments in RF glass than you doGo out and shoot. Buy those cameras. Use them. Observe. Share your experience. You are postulating from a position of specs - totally without any first-hand experience.I do shoot.  25 weddings as primary with a pro second shooter.  Many paid events.  Nowadays travel being retired.  The R8 has most of the guts of the R6II in a small body.  The major reviewers say it is hard to beat for the price.  I know the RF glass I intend to run on it.And then of course you will justify that with the millions of YouTube reviewerscorrection, Major Reviewers who have used production camerasFor all the limitations on videos, etc. that you mentioned regarding the A7C, that is why I remain invested in the RF system,and the reason why, in part, many including me would not buy the A7C - we want more than it offersfor which both my R6Mii and R7 are stellar. They are however not entry-level FF cameras.RP was what I'd call entry level - I got mine for $850.  With the R8 having many of the guts of the R6II, I'd call it a powerhouse puppy for the priceAnd again, that's based on actual shooting experiences inside studios and out in the field.for travel, A7C with the greater selection of small lenses is fine (40 f2.5, 28-60).  But some of us want more than that and the major reviewers provide those distinguishing features, with most of the guts of your R6II for just $1499Would you like me to link to the major reviewers?  Or do you just watch all the minor youtubers?

squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?The R8 is $1500. Do you think an A7Cii with your dream specs will cost $1800? Don't think so.

jwilliams wrote:squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?While the A7C (current version) doesn't have the greatest control layout, it doesn't seem too bad to meIFyou use the a lens that has a control ring. The main problem with the camera is that all the controls are operated with the thumb. If you get a lens with a physical aperture ring that allows you to set aperture with your second hand. If you shoot in aperture or manual mode then your thumb can set the other parameters.Sony has some nice lenses for use on a compact FF camera. The 28-60 that its often bundled gets good review and is truly compact for a FF zoom. There are other lenses like the 40 2.5 that would make a great compact all around prime. Also the body has IBIS so any lens is stabilized. The rangefinder format of there camera makes it less tall than a DSLR style camera and easier to pack.I don't have a R8 but do have a RP which is essentially the same camera outside the sensor and processing. Overall I'd rate it better than an A7c, but it does have shortcomings. No IBIS and not so great battery life are downsides. Otherwise its pretty good.The big difference is is Canon's lack of compact lens options if you want a truly compact setup. The new 24-50 is a step to address that, but its bigger than the Sony 28-60 and the closest thing to the Sony 40 2.5 is the Canon 50 1.8 but it's not stabilized. If you want something wider you have to go to the RF 35 1.8 IS . I have both of those lenses and overall they are fine. The 35 isn't really compact and the 50 has no IS and has a bit tight FOV for overall use (for me).To summarize, the Sony is better if you want a truly compact setup with a few really compact lenses. The Canon is a better camera overall if you'll also use it with larger lenses and don't need IBIS.I also have an RP and the 35mm f1.8, combo that I like very much. I hope we will see an RF version of the 40mm pancake, one of my all-time favorite lenses.

I don't see either camera pulling a person away from the ecosystem in which they are already invested.

MAC wrote:thunder storm wrote:MAC wrote:thunder storm wrote:squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?I would really need some information about what subjects you would like to shoot and what lenses you would prefer for that. It's simply impossible to answer your question without that info, sorry.+2and provide a 3rd criteria, what budget one hasbtw - I think if you are not invested in Canon FF glass, etc, and a great 50 is your thing, then a new A7CII + new sony 50 F1.4, + the puppy 28-60 make a lot of sense as the future winner - depending on what you shoot and if you can afford itThat 50mm f/1.4 GM is probably the sweet spot for just one prime for both walk around purposes and portraits.agreefor you storm, that A7CII could be your light carry, and two body carry with your A74It should have a front dial and 32Mp. Not sure if that happens.we shall seeAnd at that point I would sell the R5. I don't want three full frame bodies.understood, perhaps sell now with migration planThat is a financially point of view. The thing is: the camera is creating very nice pictures for me, and I'm not ready to part with it.Low light AF with both the 50mm f/1.2 GM and 28mm Art is good enough with the A7IV.agreeand perhaps even re-consider the tamy 35-150 f2.8 -- @ f2.8 is should be ok with -3EVMaybe. A zoom wins for immediacy, can't beat that with a dual camera setup.Selling the R5 means ditching the EF 24-70mm mkII as well, and R5 is also the preferred camera for the RF 105mm f/1.4, at least for handling, and very likely for AF too (didn't test it yet with the A7IV).ahh, you need to do that testI'm not in a hurry. I just did a shoot with my daughter in the arboretum, 50GM on the A7IV, 105Art on the R5. I rather spend my time enjoying the glass without lens changes than spilling time on AF tests. I know from a lot of personal experience the R5 + 105mm delivers for AF tracking for me, and that's more important than anything. Never change a winning team.In that arboretum I also had to pose as a model by the way, as my daughter shoots an M100 + 32mm f/1.4 (didn't have the time to sell that lens, so...). She's also photographing flowers, insects, and the information boards to remember what tree it is.Good times. And spring is just starting.Maybe I should just do this every weekend with every week other trees and bushes with blossoms and flowers.AF tests with an MC11? Hell no. There are more important things in life.Of course I could ditch the 105 Art as well and use the 85mm f/1.4 DN in stead, but the 105mm has better AF on the R5 than the 85mm DN on the A7IV.are there other alternatives to the heavy 105?Beside the EF 85mm f/1.4 IS USM maybe it's the best "85mm" for fast AF (beside some f/1.8 options maybe, but I want a wider aperture). It's also the best portrait lens for round bokeh balls and other rendering aspects. A large front element is heavy, but you will get IQ in return. The RF 28-70mm f/2.0 has the best rendering of any standard zoom for the same reason. It's not just the f/2.0 spec.I also expect the 85mm DN to have a less nice rendering, but that's too early to tell from my own experience for now.The EF 24-70mm f/2.8 mkII is replaceable (by something darker and a bunch of primes), but the 105mm art isn't.a 135 perhaps?Too much compression for my taste, and even less flexible than the 105mm. 105mm can be a pain sometimes already. You will loose light as it's also f/1.8 in stead of f/1.4. Without ILIS a longer FL needs faster shutter speeds as well.If Sony releases an 85mm f/1.2 GM with for linear XD motors and a nice rendering it could be game over for Canon for me. I don't need the A7CII for that, a second A7IV might do as well.consider with your prime approach a two body carry solution -- but not carrying heavy $10,000 of stuff as you travel as light as possibleI do find it nice to reduce some weight, however, I'm not obsessed with it. No 85mm DN in the bag today. Nice bokeh makes lenses less heavy:105mm&f/1.4 SOOC (Is it better than the A7IV?). -0.3 EC was wrong, the R5 is smarter than I am sometimes.....This is the 50mm f/1.2 GM btw:f/1.2 SOOC Is it me or is are the warmer colours more pleasing?f/1.2 not the greatest composition in the world, but there where very few spots with some botanic colours as spring is just starting here. I liked the contrast with the brown autumn leaves which apparently have forgotten about seasons.There's a person in the background unfortunately. f/1.2 helps though. Maybe this is the A7IV pic with the least pleasing SOOC.f/1.2 Bokeh torture test. My daughter liked the shapes of branches of the "tree" so she commanded here photographer to take this picture.f/1.2 as a landscape aperture. 32Mp only though. I'm so sorry the corners are either out of focus or blown out. If you pixel peep you'll see a bridge in the background on the right side of the picture just on the left of the chimney. That's 15.9 Km away, and we're at 50mm here.This is all f/1.2, but remember, the f/1.4 GM is very close for creating bokeh and just as sharp wide open, and it does itweighting only 516 grams. In my opinion that's a huge benefit of the A7C over the RP.The pictures of me taken by my daughter are her intellectual property, so unfortunately I can't show those pics here to get some feedback on my posing skills.My daughter posing like this and steering her photographer makes me contemplating my needs for AF tracking speeds. For my youngest kid those needs are out of doubt, but apparently these things can change. The 4x XD linear motor equipped 85mm f/1.2 GM or RF 85mm f/1.2 (Ü)USM mkII might come too late for me.

squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?Mostly like it will be $2200 not $1800 due to inflation, see how a7iv is $500 more than a7III? Fx30 is $400 more than a6600 at announcement priceAt $700 difference there is enough for a few lens + R8 vs body only on A7CIIThe most likely competitor to R8 will be ZV-E1 which is FF body for vlog at same or even cheaper price as R8. The E1 surely won't have EVF or maybe IBIS but should be even lighter than R8.

take the hypothetical camera - you can get each spec you want to have and just need to pay hypothetical cash.never use an real existing camera. Once bought, you can’t get better change specs…

squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?Sony has 3 new cameras that have been registered so announcements could be sooner than later.A solid guess is the A7c mk2 is amongst those 3.No leaked specs of anything from Sony yet.I think price has a lot of bearing on purchases for many, the A7c price hasn't budged but the RP haas reduced PLENTY since its release.I'll wait and hope that the R8 goes the same direction as the RP in price.

CamerEyes wrote:I answered this question even before the R8 came out: For entry-level FF, the Sony A7C is still the body to beat, which is why I bought it and sold my RP.The RP and R8 both do not have IBIS, which is me is a major omission. Not least, the battery life from LP-E17 is a joke compared to what Sony uses in the A7C.Classic deficit thinking.

thunder storm wrote:MAC wrote:thunder storm wrote:MAC wrote:thunder storm wrote:squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?I would really need some information about what subjects you would like to shoot and what lenses you would prefer for that. It's simply impossible to answer your question without that info, sorry.+2and provide a 3rd criteria, what budget one hasbtw - I think if you are not invested in Canon FF glass, etc, and a great 50 is your thing, then a new A7CII + new sony 50 F1.4, + the puppy 28-60 make a lot of sense as the future winner - depending on what you shoot and if you can afford itThat 50mm f/1.4 GM is probably the sweet spot for just one prime for both walk around purposes and portraits.agreefor you storm, that A7CII could be your light carry, and two body carry with your A74It should have a front dial and 32Mp. Not sure if that happens.we shall seeAnd at that point I would sell the R5. I don't want three full frame bodies.understood, perhaps sell now with migration planThat is a financially point of view. The thing is: the camera is creating very nice pictures for me, and I'm not ready to part with it.I see that, thanks for showing us the photos belowLow light AF with both the 50mm f/1.2 GM and 28mm Art is good enough with the A7IV.agreeand perhaps even re-consider the tamy 35-150 f2.8 -- @ f2.8 is should be ok with -3EVMaybe. A zoom wins for immediacy, can't beat that with a dual camera setup.I heard Dustin Abbott say he loves his. And I think I read his site where Tamy is doing firmware updates to improve speed when they canSelling the R5 means ditching the EF 24-70mm mkII as well, and R5 is also the preferred camera for the RF 105mm f/1.4, at least for handling, and very likely for AF too (didn't test it yet with the A7IV).ahh, you need to do that testI'm not in a hurry. I just did a shoot with my daughter in the arboretum, 50GM on the A7IV, 105Art on the R5. I rather spend my time enjoying the glass without lens changes than spilling time on AF tests. I know from a lot of personal experience the R5 + 105mm delivers for AF tracking for me, and that's more important than anything.Never change a winning team.got it,agree with the matches made in heavenIn that arboretum I also had to pose as a model by the way, as my daughter shoots an M100 + 32mm f/1.4 (didn't have the time to sell that lens, so...). She's also photographing flowers, insects, and the information boards to remember what tree it is.now that is priceless time spent with your daughter -- and she gets the great lens - that is precious!!!Good times. And spring is just starting.Maybe I should just do this every weekend with every week other trees and bushes with blossoms and flowers.yes indeed, as much as you can!AF tests with an MC11? Hell no. There are more important things in life.Looks like you got your priorities right!Of course I could ditch the 105 Art as well and use the 85mm f/1.4 DN in stead, but the 105mm has better AF on the R5 than the 85mm DN on the A7IV.are there other alternatives to the heavy 105?Beside the EF 85mm f/1.4 IS USM maybe it's the best "85mm" for fast AF (beside some f/1.8 options maybe, but I want a wider aperture). It's also the best portrait lens for round bokeh balls and other rendering aspects. A large front element is heavy, but you will get IQ in return.I see that in your photo with the 105 belowThe RF 28-70mm f/2.0 has the best rendering of any standard zoom for the same reason. It's not just the f/2.0 spec.I also expect the 85mm DN to have a less nice rendering, but that's too early to tell from my own experience for now.The EF 24-70mm f/2.8 mkII is replaceable (by something darker and a bunch of primes), but the 105mm art isn't.a 135 perhaps?Too much compression for my taste, and even less flexible than the 105mm. 105mm can be a pain sometimes already. You will loose light as it's also f/1.8 in stead of f/1.4. Without ILIS a longer FL needs faster shutter speeds as well.If Sony releases an 85mm f/1.2 GM with for linear XD motors and a nice rendering it could be game over for Canon for me. I don't need the A7CII for that, a second A7IV might do as well.consider with your prime approach a two body carry solution -- but not carrying heavy $10,000 of stuff as you travel as light as possibleI do find it nice to reduce some weight, however, I'm not obsessed with it. No 85mm DN in the bag today. Nice bokeh makes lenses less heavy:Thank you for posting these storm wide open, SOOC, and iso 100seeing your 105 mm shot, I can see why this lens is known as the Bokeh Master!and seeing your 50 mm examples, I agree with Atsuo!"Speaking as an optical designer, it's no exaggeration to call this lens the pinnacle of the G Master series, with the ultimate in resolution and bokeh." [Atsuo Kikuchi, Sony]for this one, if you take the SOOC shot and apply a one click in photoshop on auto tone and then apply a bit of vibrance and a bit of saturation, the photograph warms up and just pops bigtime105mm&f/1.4 SOOC (Is it better than the A7IV?). -0.3 EC was wrong, the R5 is smarter than I am sometimes.....This is the 50mm f/1.2 GM btw:yes, the SOOC tone and colors of your 50 are more pleasing than your 105  - but you can process your 105 photos to pop alsof/1.2 SOOC Is it me or is are the warmer colours more pleasing?ahh, nice memories, and great activity together and glad you gave her one of the best lenses on the planet!f/1.2 not the greatest composition in the world, but there where very few spots with some botanic colours as spring is just starting here. I liked the contrast with the brown autumn leaves which apparently have forgotten about seasons.The cloudy day overall acted like a giant softbox -- a great lighting situation to avoid shadows for iso 100the one below had some backlit situation with the water reflections which is more challenging SOOCThere's a person in the background unfortunately. f/1.2 helps though. Maybe this is the A7IV pic with the least pleasing SOOC.and the bokeh torture test did better than most other lenses could dof/1.2 Bokeh torture test. My daughter liked the shapes of branches of the "tree" so she commanded here photographer to take this picture.f/1.2 as a landscape aperture. 32Mp only though. I'm so sorry the corners are either out of focus or blown out. If you pixel peep you'll see a bridge in the background on the right side of the picture just on the left of the chimney. That's 15.9 Km away, and we're at 50mm here.thanks again for posting picsThis is all f/1.2, but remember, the f/1.4 GM is very close for creating bokeh and just as sharp wide open, and it does itweighting only 516 grams.In my opinion that's a huge benefit of the A7C over the RP.I'd agree with that if 50 mm prime is the main thing for the buyerthen again, such a great lens may deserve a better body like your A74for me, the RF 24-105 F4L and RF 85 F2 IS were the main things for Rp and soon the new R8 i will receive - and will someday add the RF 100-400 and 1.4 ext to the R8 lineupThe pictures of me taken by my daughter are her intellectual property, so unfortunately I can't show those pics here to get some feedback on my posing skills.hehe, she keeps pictures of you to herself  -- sweet memories for sureMy daughter posing like this and steering her photographer makes me contemplating my needs for AF tracking speeds. For my youngest kid those needs are out of doubt, but apparently these things can change. The 4x XD linear motor equipped 85mm f/1.2 GM or RF 85mm f/1.2 (Ü)USM mkII might come too late for me.I think you've helped me understand the need for speed with these primes  -- one invests in the latest technology for subject tracking and then has to resort to spot focus with stm focus systems -- so what Sony is doing with those motors is great to be able to keep up with the bodies auto subject tracking  -- hopefully they push Canon on improving the speed motors in their primes.  Now if we are talking zoom sports lenses like the RF 70-200, Canon has us covered.  For me the pop can sized RF 70-200 F4L may be in my future.  When subjects are moving fast, I care about focus primarily, bokeh is not on my mindContinue to enjoy!

The A7C II, no question. Better form factor and a much better lens selection. For me this would be a no brainer.

MikeJ9116 wrote:I don't see either camera pulling a person away from the ecosystem in which they are already invested.True, but my answer was based on starting from scratch.

dmanthree wrote:MikeJ9116 wrote:I don't see either camera pulling a person away from the ecosystem in which they are already invested.True, but my answer was based on starting from scratch.you answered the Sony, what lenses would you put on it?

CamerEyes wrote:squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?I answered this question even before the R8 came out: For entry-level FF, the Sony A7C is still the body to beat, which is why I bought it and sold my RP. The RP and R8 both do not have IBIS, which is me is a major omission. Not least, the battery life from LP-E17 is a joke compared to what Sony uses in the A7C.The A7Cii will likely have IBIS as well. Canon needs to stop making IBIS a "premium feature" as well as come up with a better battery solution for smaller bodies.The only negative here is that while the A7C has IBIS, it's not especially effective. Maybe it will give you 1-2 stops, but not 5-8 like a Canon R5/R6 (or Sony's new A7RV).It's better than nothing though, of course.

thunder storm wrote:MAC wrote:thunder storm wrote:squarewave wrote:Let's say the A7C II is announced with the same form factor, buttons, physical controls etc and the only changes are that it has the new menus, the A7 IV sensor, and cropped 4K 60 recording for $1800.If you were in the market for a compact FF camera and the choice was down to the R8 or A7C II as described above, which would you choose?I would really need some information about what subjects you would like to shoot and what lenses you would prefer for that. It's simply impossible to answer your question without that info, sorry.+2and provide a 3rd criteria, what budget one hasbtw - I think if you are not invested in Canon FF glass, etc, and a great 50 is your thing, then a new A7CII + new sony 50 F1.4, + the puppy 28-60 make a lot of sense as the future winner - depending on what you shoot and if you can afford itThat 50mm f/1.4 GM is probably the sweet spot for just one prime for both walk around purposes and portraits.for you storm, that A7CII could be your light carry, and two body carry with your A74It should have a front dial and 32Mp. Not sure if that happens. And at that point I would sell the R5. I don't want three full frame bodies. Low light AF with both the 50mm f/1.2 GM and 28mm Art is good enough with the A7IV.Selling the R5 means ditching the EF 24-70mm mkII as well, and R5 is also the preferred camera for the RF 105mm f/1.4, at least for handling, and very likely for AF too (didn't test it yet with the A7IV). Of course I could ditch the 105 Art as well and use the 85mm f/1.4 DN in stead, but the 105mm has better AF on the R5 than the 85mm DN on the A7IV. I also expect the 85mm DN to have a less nice rendering, but that's too early to tell from my own experience for now.The EF 24-70mm f/2.8 mkII is replaceable (by something darker and a bunch of primes), but the 105mm art isn't. If Sony releases an 85mm f/1.2 GM with for linear XD motors and a nice rendering it could be game over for Canon for me. I don't need the A7CII for that, a second A7IV might do as well.Why not use the Sigma 105 on the Sony? MC-11 adapter. You're using it with an adapter on the R5 anyway.

dmanthree wrote:MikeJ9116 wrote:I don't see either camera pulling a person away from the ecosystem in which they are already invested.True, but my answer was based on starting from scratch.The premise of your question isn't applicable in the real world. The number of people who dive into FF ILC photography starting with a $1,500-$2,000 camera plus thousands of dollars in lenses and other accessories, are very, very few. I would wager a person just getting into photography would buy Canon gear based on their reputation. Many people know Canon as a quality camera company. I don't think the first thing most people who are just becoming interested in photography will think about Sony as an option. The overwhelming majority of people buying ILCs these days have been doing so for a long, long time and are already invested in a brand.

dmanthree wrote:The A7C II, no question. Better form factor and a much better lens selection. For me this would be a no brainer.I do give a lot of credit to Sony regarding their gains in the number E mount lenses that are available.  They embraced third party lenses and it has paid big dividends in making people buy their cameras and Sony branded lenses.  Canon had such a lead on them 5-10 years ago and now it seems the opposite is true regarding native RF an E mount lenses.  Every few weeks it seems that 2-3 more third party E mount lenses are announced.

The problem is R8 price except for US. It is good price in US for $1500. But everywhere else is something like $1700 or $1800, which seems to fall A7C II price range.