to cut a long story short:
- after having started to use DSLRs five years ago with a used 5D classic,
- I switched to a much more modern 70D, but then
- I missed the full frame sensor, and since
- the 6D Mark II was not available
- I bought a used 6D.
For my recent trip to Australia, I planned to take my 70D as a mere backup body, but then ended to use both cameras: my neck was able to sustain a 70D with 70-200 F4 AND a 6D with 17-40 F/4 or 24-105 F/4. And the combo worked well! I didn't need to switch from a wide-angle lens to a tele in (sometimes) bad conditions.
[Before I eliminate the duplicates and missed shots, I have about 800 70D pictures and 1,600 6D pictures].
Originally I thought that, if the 6D Mark II had a (reasonably) good autofocus + DPAF + articulated screen, I could buy it and replace BOTH the 6D and the 70D, but now I start to have doubts: maybe two is better than one (as long as my neck resist).
BTW: I wonder if my neck could hold a heavier combo (i.e. 70D + 100-400mm AND 6D + ...).
What do you think, fellow friends from CanonRumors? If you expect to take pictures of (for example) wildlife + landscapes, do you take one camera with you (and switch lenses) or two cameras (keeping the second one in the backpack or not)?