Canon: Save up to $1,850 on select Refurbished Cameras, Lenses + Free Shipping

I got the R with the 24-105 F4 lens for ~$1888 with Canon refurb and 10% loyalty discount maybe a year ago now. I've yet to see the body drop sub $1000 though

I am still rocking the T2i, while it is operational, I was hoping to move on to the mirrorless and get the adapter for it so I can use all the EF lenses I have.

Reading this thread didn't give me a warm and fuzzy to pick up a refurb mirrorless body. As mentioned by another poster. That Sony, etc has surpassed canon, if starting all over, I just may consider the Sony line.

These refurbs seem to be very old, so while new to me, the technology itself in these camera seem to be behind by todays standard.

Should I just bite the bullet and start again but this time, perhaps with Sony mirrorless? All input is greatly appreciated.

I bought 4 brand new 5d Mark IV's right before the pandemic for $1799 a piece. Once the pandemic hit, prices increased to $2,499 and haven't really came down since. That's over three years without a discount or sales price.
Is $1,499 a great price for a used version? Not compared to what I paid, but maybe compared to modern prices. Depends on how many pictures were taken on it.
I've been waiting for new stock to clearance out at around this same price before purchasing more.
I'm sure some are interested in upgrading to mirrorless, but then all your Canon camera lenses have to be upgraded since they use RF mounts, or you have to purchase adaptors.
Imo, the mirrorless cameras haven't advanced enough or ironed out all of their issues to plunk down the extra cash.
The reviews of the newer models show limitations when it comes to capturing movement. Like warping of objects due to the way the shutter works on them.
Imo, $1,299 or less for a refurbished model would be a better deal.
If you don't currently have a camera or lenses I'd stay away from Canon.
Sony & Nikon, IMO have greatly surpassed them in dynamic range, resolution, focus, and picture quality.
I love the Mark IV, but it has nasty grain levels at ISO's above 2,500. I consider pictures above 3200 unusable even with heavy grain reduction.
This makes night time/dark lit events difficult to capture without super expensive 2.8F lenses.
I also own the Canon 5D III. In some situations, I actually think it produces a higher quality image.
Those can be found used for $500. You're really only going to see advantages in video with the newer model.
I

Doesn't seem like much of a sale. The rp body is the same price as it was a few months ago.

What's the best bang for my buck if I don't care about video options? My newest camera body is the 6D and I've been happy with that but maybe time for an upgrade? edited to add, I need to be able to use my current lenses and full frame is a must.

Thanks for this, I'm shopping for something decent yet affordable rn. I used to be into photography but only had an old digital rebel. I can tell you know your stuff. You don't think the m50 is any good? It's 600 on this "sale" but I've seen it go for ~300 brand new looking on Craigslist.
I'd totally get a 5dm3 for 500 but wouldn't those older models have tons of clicks already?

Depends on what you're going to use it for. For Youtube videos with minimal movement? Probably good enough.
For quality photography? Probably not unless everything is taken outside in bright light. It's a crop sensor.
While I've never used this model, most are terrible in low light.
Like anything above 800 ISO will be a major grain fest.
I've heard this model and ones like it have the shutter issue where it captures motion weird.
Like if an object is moving too fast it slightly warps it. Most of the mirrorless cameras do that.
Even the brand new one Canon just put out.
It was hilarious when all of these mirrorless cameras first cameout. Everyone was posting pictures claiming they were amazing.
They didn't even notice all of the crazy warping.
If you're not shooting moving objects you might not notice.
But it's been my experience that the newest Iphone's in portrait mode take a higher quality image than any crop sensor camera Canon makes.

I hear you. I might do some motion, not a ton. Mostly similar to these? https://www.dpreview.com/samples/...le-gallery and they look alright.
The m50 is newer technology and lighter, with a lens it's about half the price of a body only 5dm3.
Looks like those are all from Seattle, so it's cloudy. But I guess a photographer wouldn't technically describe that as "low light".

I hear you. I might do some motion, not a ton. Mostly similar to these? https://www.dpreview.com/samples/...le-gallery and they look alright.
The m50 is newer technology and lighter, with a lens it's about half the price of a body only 5dm3.
Looks like those are all from Seattle, so it's cloudy. But I guess a photographer wouldn't technically describe that as "low light".

I bought 4 brand new 5d Mark IV's right before the pandemic for $1799 a piece. Once the pandemic hit, prices increased to $2,499 and haven't really came down since. That's over three years without a discount or sales price.
Is $1,499 a great price for a used version? Not compared to what I paid, but maybe compared to modern prices. Depends on how many pictures were taken on it.
I've been waiting for new stock to clearance out at around this same price before purchasing more.
I'm sure some are interested in upgrading to mirrorless, but then all your Canon camera lenses have to be upgraded since they use RF mounts, or you have to purchase adaptors.
Imo, the mirrorless cameras haven't advanced enough or ironed out all of their issues to plunk down the extra cash.
The reviews of the newer models show limitations when it comes to capturing movement. Like warping of objects due to the way the shutter works on them.
Imo, $1,299 or less for a refurbished model would be a better deal.
If you don't currently have a camera or lenses I'd stay away from Canon.
Sony & Nikon, IMO have greatly surpassed them in dynamic range, resolution, focus, and picture quality.
I love the Mark IV, but it has nasty grain levels at ISO's above 2,500. I consider pictures above 3200 unusable even with heavy grain reduction.
This makes night time/dark lit events difficult to capture without super expensive 2.8F lenses.
I also own the Canon 5D III. In some situations, I actually think it produces a higher quality image.
Those can be found used for $500. You're really only going to see advantages in video with the newer model.
I

They don't look great to me, but I'm also a super picky photographer.
I would compare these samples to something like the older Ti series would take.
Like they aren't sharp to me. Minor aberration and color distortion.
What you would expect from a cheap stock lens.
Similar to what I'd see in a mid level point and click camera.
The detail just isn't there.
I doubt you'd see any photo quality improvement from this compared to a newer
Iphone or Android phone. Full frame cameras are a big jump.
If I couldn't afford a full frame camera, I'd just purchase the best phone camera I could afford.
It doesn't make sense to carry around a camera when the quality won't be better.