The second hand market on MPB is worth looking at. Alternatively can buy a new Canon r7 for about £800 if you time it right and get a deal, and combine with a Sigma 150-600mm lens for significantly less than a Canon 150-500, especially if secondhand. That's what my plan is for when my 7dII and 400mm prime are finally worn out. There is a quality drop with the Sigma compared to Canon gear, but if it's for record shots rather than professional photography it doesn't really matter.
Any R7 for £800 will be grey market, not genuine uk stock and would be better avoided . The canon Rf 100- 400
Is much lighter and cheaper than the sigma if a casual photographer ,as the sigma are quite
Large and heavy and don't ballance well on the added adapter, on the smaller mirrorless
The second hand market on MPB is worth looking at. Alternatively can buy a new Canon r7 for about £800 if you time it right and get a deal, and combine with a Sigma 150-600mm lens for significantly less than a Canon 150-500, especially if secondhand. That's what my plan is for when my 7dII and 400mm prime are finally worn out. There is a quality drop with the Sigma compared to Canon gear, but if it's for record shots rather than professional photography it doesn't really matter.
I am not what you would call a keen photographer - in fact I forget my camera as often as I take it. As such I only have fairly basic gear - a canon DSLR and a 70-300 zoom is my standard kit. But I am thinking of upgrading to something a bit better - probably mirrorless. So, my question is, am I better sticking with Canon - I believe my current lenses will still work with the new EOS R models with an adapter, and maybe buying a slightly longer lens too, or should I switch completely to Sony. Their cameras seem smaller and their lenses seem to offer greater magnification for the same focal length. Any opinions on both brands/potential alternatives appreciated but please bear in mind I am a birder foremost with a passing interest in photography so I dont need a 600mm lens and a £2k camera. thanks in advance
Sony and Canon give the same focal length in fact canon crop cameras have a 1.6 crop apposed to 1.5 in sony . If you cant afford £2000 I would say stick with what you have,as the cheapest decent enough birding mirrorless set up is the R7 Canon with the R100-400 lens wich will cost you just over 2 grand. If you just have a 70-300 old lens, id say start again with the r lenses as most cheaper older lenses will not give you the sharpest shots of the 31mp sensor of the R7 . Unfortunately now there is no cheap way into bird photography, you will have to top £2000 to top what you already have . Putting an old 70-300 lens via adapter on a new Mirroless body would be like putting a mini engine in a Porch .
I am not what you would call a keen photographer - in fact I forget my camera as often as I take it. As such I only have fairly basic gear - a canon DSLR and a 70-300 zoom is my standard kit. But I am thinking of upgrading to something a bit better - probably mirrorless. So, my question is, am I better sticking with Canon - I believe my current lenses will still work with the new EOS R models with an adapter, and maybe buying a slightly longer lens too, or should I switch completely to Sony. Their cameras seem smaller and their lenses seem to offer greater magnification for the same focal length. Any opinions on both brands/potential alternatives appreciated but please bear in mind I am a birder foremost with a passing interest in photography so I dont need a 600mm lens and a £2k camera. thanks in advance
__________________
No one on their death bed ever said they wished they'd spent more time at work. http://bitsnbirds.blogspot.co.uk
