Read our detailed comparison of the Canon EOS R6 vs Canon EOS RP to find out their strengths and weaknesses, and decide which one to choose.
As an enthusiast that takes portraits, travel, some macro, some wildlife, and a desire to do more sports and birding; I've always wanted to upgrade my SL1 to a full frame sensor/mirrorless.
Price is a big deal for me, and I want to buy once cry once--i want a camera that will last me the next 8+ years. Reviews on the RP look great, and I don't pretend to be an expert--im confused though, because while the R6 mkii has a few nice features I can't see why it costs twice as much. Is the R6 mkii worth the upgrade, and/or will it be more future proof?
Being price-sensitive, I would suggest looking really hard at the lens ecosystem. Canon has blocked the production of third-party autofocus lenses for RF mount with legal threats, and the more desirable first-party options tend to be pricey. Nikon allows some third-party lenses on Z-mount, and Sony of course has a huge selection on E-mount.
Nikon has a somewhat comparable option in the Z5, but with Sony, the budget option is used. Both the A7 III and A9 are selling for a bit over $1000 on Ebay if you're patient.
It was pretty well-documented - here's one source. Most of the manufacturers have some sort of limits or controls on third-party lenses, usually with patents that should have failed the obviousness test. I believe the state of the mirrorless ecosystem is:
Third-party AF lenses forbidden:
Canon RF
Third-party lenses approved on a case-by-case basis:
Ooh, a whole new world not limiting myself to Canon--from glancing around and some of the other comments it looks like Sony has some really nice options.