# Lightweight 2nd Camera



## yankiefrankie (Dec 7, 2022)

I currently have a Canon R3 and a bunch of RF lenses. I am very happy with this setup, and it really works for me. I shoot everything, and my lenses cover all my needs.

However, I really want a compact camera that I can always take with me. I was thinking the Sony A7C + Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8 would fit this. It is a very compact body, and the lens is as well.

I have no desire to replace/replicate my Canon kit with Sony, so I am thinking of this camera/lens combo as a one and done. If I think the situation might require multiple lenes I will just bring my R3. I love the R3. I find it a joy to use. However, it will not fit in a small camera bag even when I have my smallest lens (RF24-105f/4L) attached.

I know the A7C gets flack for the sometimes-uncomfortable ergonomics and viewfinder, but I am hoping this isn't an issue in my case when I am looking for extreme portability. I've mused about getting an A7IV instead, and while this is a much better camera, it is significantly larger, and if I was going that route, why not just get an R6 Mark ii than can use all my existing lenses. I'm not sure if I would like the R6 route, because I just sold an R5 (just a little bigger) and found the R5+25-105L combo to be a bit too big as a carry always combo. I really hate the RF small lens options due to their lack of weather sealing and noisy/slow STM motors. This is why the Tamron 20-40 is such a winner (enter Sony).

So here I am with the A7C. Does this seem like the way to go? Would I be happier with the 20-40 and an A74 instead? Will I appreciate its ergonomics and extra features over the A7C or will the added size make me leave it home more?

I appreciate any thoughts on this. This is about as first world a problem as they come!


----------



## Maximilian (Dec 7, 2022)

As Canon‘s smallest FF is the RP and if FF is set, then I see no alternative here from Canon.
If you could live with APS-C I‘d wait for what Canon might deliver in early 2023.

About ergonomics of the Sony:
Try it out, maybe lend a cam for a few days.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2022)

When I want to trade the image quality and performance of my R3 kit for something more portable and convenient but still a step up from my iPhone, I bring an M6II, M11-22, M18-150 and M22/2, all of which fit in a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 20 (or in separate small Lowepro cases in a bigger backpack with other items). I have not found a FF kit that can match it for small size, and the M kit delivers very good IQ.


----------



## yankiefrankie (Dec 7, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> When I want to trade the image quality and performance of my R3 kit for something more portable and convenient but still a step up from my iPhone, I bring an M6II, M11-22, M18-150 and M22/2, all of which fit in a Think Tank Mirrorless Mover 20 (or in separate small Lowepro cases in a bigger backpack with other items). I have not found a FF kit that can match it for small size, and the M kit delivers very good IQ.


So, it is not just me who thinks there is value in having an incompatible system just to have a lighter option. That M6II kit seems like a good combo for an R3. 

I really wish Canon had this Tamron 20-40.


----------



## jd7 (Dec 8, 2022)

I can certainly understand Neuro's suggestion of the Canon M system for a small/light second camera ... but I can also see the attraction in an A7C (or A7 IV) with the Tamron 20-40mm and perhaps the Samyang 75mm f/1.8. That would be a small, light and pretty flexible full frame kit. I should say that apart from the A7 IV, I don't have personal experience with the other gear, so I am just going on what I have seen/read. I may yet get myself a Tamron 20-40mm and Samyang 75mm though (although I have no intention of parting with my 24-70 so I need to decide whether the 20-40mm or something like a 17-28 or 16-35 makes more sense for me).


----------



## AlanF (Dec 8, 2022)

yankiefrankie said:


> So, it is not just me who thinks there is value in having an incompatible system just to have a lighter option. That M6II kit seems like a good combo for an R3.
> 
> I really wish Canon had this Tamron 20-40.


There can be a problem with having incompatible systems when you travel and need to take both systems with you. When you are on a safari or any other photographic trip you are taking a chance if you don't have back-up bodies, lenses and maybe chargers. Having compatible systems, like two R bodies, makes life simpler.


----------



## Del Paso (Dec 8, 2022)

I'm considering getting an EOS R7 as a backup and lightweight body, offering full system compatibility.
Its other advantage would be extending the range of RF/EF tele lenses, if used as a second body.
And Canon ergonomics are certainly better than Sony's. I hated my A7...


----------



## yankiefrankie (Dec 14, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I'm considering getting an EOS R7 as a backup and lightweight body, offering full system compatibility.
> Its other advantage would be extending the range of RF/EF tele lenses, if used as a second body.
> And Canon ergonomics are certainly better than Sony's. I hated my A7...


I'd would like an r7 if I could get this 20-40 Tamron for it! 

Thanks everyone for replying. I did get the A7c and the Tamron 20-40. I think it is the way to go for me. It is really small and has very similar image quality as my R3. The ergonomics are terrible compared to the R3, but I knew that coming into it. But because I have the R3 and it's fabulous ergonomics, I actually don't mind the Sony. It's good for what I got it for: something small to take when I don't want to take the R3, but still want great image quality. I don't think I would want to use it with a lens any bigger than the 20-40. Actually, this lens is great. Really small and it covers a very useful range at f/2.8. I do prefer the range of my RF 15-35 f/2.8 but it's 2.5x the weight.


----------



## AlanF (Dec 14, 2022)

Del Paso said:


> I'm considering getting an EOS R7 as a backup and lightweight body, offering full system compatibility.
> Its other advantage would be extending the range of RF/EF tele lenses, if used as a second body.
> And Canon ergonomics are certainly better than Sony's. I hated my A7...


It's the most sensible choice in many ways, especially for when travelling and you need back ups if a lens or body fails.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 14, 2022)

AlanF said:


> It's the most sensible choice in many ways, especially for when travelling and you need back ups if a lens or body fails.


That’s an excellent point. If Canon ports the M11-22 to RF-S, I would consider the R10 with 11-22 and 18-150 instead of the M6II with that lens pair for major trips, where the R10 could serve as a backup to the R3.


----------



## AlanF (Dec 14, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> That’s an excellent point. If Canon ports the M11-22 to RF-S, I would consider the R10 with 11-22 and 18-150 instead of the M6II with that lens pair for major trips, where the R10 could serve as a backup to the R3.


I've got the RF 18-150, and it works fine. I'll get an RF 10-22 if and when it appears.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 14, 2022)

AlanF said:


> I've got the RF 18-150, and it works fine. I'll get an RF 10-22 if and when it appears.


Yes, I've been happy with my M18-150, and the optics in the RF-S 18-150 are the same as the EF-M lens. 

Side note: the R10 is now $200 off, I'm somewhat tempted to just buy the R10 + 18-150 kit now, it's <$1200. However, there was also a recent CR3 post about an 'EOS R camera between the R7 and R10' coming in 2Q23. If that camera is a philosophical replacement of the M6II, i.e. higher end features (for a Canon APS-C MILC) in a smaller no-EVF form factor, that would be a better option for my travel kit. Since I often advise, "If you need it now, buy it. If you don't need it now, something better will come along soon," I suppose I'll take my own advice – I don't really have a non-travel use for an RF-mount APS-C body and I'm not traveling until summer 2023, so I'll resist the temptation to buy the R10 and see what Canon brings out between now and then.


----------



## Maximilian (Dec 15, 2022)

neuroanatomist said:


> That’s an excellent point. If Canon ports the M11-22 to RF-S, I would consider the R10 with 11-22 and 18-150 instead of the M6II with that lens pair for major trips, where the R10 could serve as a backup to the R3.


And that's where my idea comes back into the game:


Maximilian said:


> If you could live with APS-C I‘d wait for what Canon might deliver in early 2023.


Maybe canon will deliver something in 2023 even smaller than the R10 and more in M6 size, as rumored...


----------



## Maximilian (Dec 15, 2022)

yankiefrankie said:


> I'd would like an r7 if I could get this 20-40 Tamron for it!
> 
> Thanks everyone for replying. I did get the A7c and the Tamron 20-40. I think it is the way to go for me. It is really small and has very similar image quality as my R3. The ergonomics are terrible compared to the R3, but I knew that coming into it. But because I have the R3 and it's fabulous ergonomics, I actually don't mind the Sony. It's good for what I got it for: something small to take when I don't want to take the R3, but still want great image quality. I don't think I would want to use it with a lens any bigger than the 20-40. Actually, this lens is great. Really small and it covers a very useful range at f/2.8. I do prefer the range of my RF 15-35 f/2.8 but it's 2.5x the weight.


Thanks for letting us know your decision and your first impressions. 
I hope you'll get used to its ergonomics. Otherwise you can consider what has been discussed here afterwards.


----------

