Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 1:50 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 3:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
I have got a 7D which I love and and would always consider it as my main camera for chasing wildlife, but there is many times where I have need of a second body.
Typically I keep the 70 -300L on it and then change to the canon 15-85, Sigma 30 or the canon 85 for a more landscape or portrait type shot.
Its getting annoying, in particular when traveling or exploring the country site where I could be changing lenses every few minutes.


I am interested in a FF body as I find that when taking photos of the kids, for the extra bit of subject isolation and being able to use the lenses in their proper design range would be nice.
The 6D would make a nice accompaniment to the 7D and would be used for Landscape and portrait work. Leaving action to the 7D.

My wife also enjoys photography and has expressed interest in something smaller, lighter and less conspicuous. Hard to disagree, they are very valid points and a while ago nearly bought a 600D.
So have to admit, my ears pricked up when I heard about the 100D and after reading Gordon`s review, I am very interested.

This got me thinking, because I can honestly say I am more than happy with the results I am getting with the 7D from image quality point of view.
But just like you can never have enough horsepower :D , less noise at higher iso and more MP, is handy and nice to have. Gives you more scope for cropping or when you resize to a smaller picture you can hide more imperfections. So I would like the 6D for that.
But I can buy a wide angle lens and a brighter zoom lens and buy the 100D ( or a 650D , the 100D is too expensive at this point ).


1) buy a 100D and a wide angle lens ie canon`s 10-22 or Tokina or Sigma and a 2.8 zoom lens like the tamron 24-70 vc usd sp ---- for general purpose and portrait type work

2) buy a 6D and the 17- 40L ----- the 70-300L is a f4 lens up to 105mm , it would become a reasonable portrait lens.


Is image quality of the lanscape shot I take with a 100D and a 10-22 at going to be that much different to the landscape shot I take with the 6D and the 17-40?

Is image quality of the portrait shot I take with a 100D and a Tamron 24-70 at F2.8 lens going to be much different to the 6D and a the 70-300 at f4?



I have never seen ff as the "Holy Grail" or a goal that I was aiming for, from what I have seen the crop sensor does a mighty fine job.
So just curious about what others think, is it worth going to ff or is better to add a couple of suitable lenses and sticking with the aps-c sensor

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 4:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:02 am
Posts: 376
I can't make this decision for you. But my 2 cents. I have a 50D and I'm totally satisfied with it. I also have a 40mm pancake lens and wasn't quite satisfied with it on crop format. I found a really good deal on the 5D Mk2 and grabbed one. Now I love my 40mm pancake. Your lenses will behave different on the 2 formats (cropped and full frame). I feel the main limitation on camera size is the lenses and not the bodies. (I kept both bodies for this reason.) I also used to have a 1000D and replaced it with the 50D, and I would not go back due the small grip size and lack of buttons and missing top LCD screen.

I'm not sure if there's a major difference between a 17-40 fullframe or 10-22 crop. It's your money. I've played around with a demo 10-22 on crop and 16-35 FF, and ddin't see much difference (other than possible DoF and noise @ high ISO). I just like having fullframe for my cheap pancake lens, lol. So buying a $1500 camera for a $150 lens is not the typical usage scenario.

Just go to your local camera dealer with your existing camera and lenses. Attach demo lenses to your 7D and attach your existing lenses to a full frame demo model. Test it out and see what works best for you. That's what I did. I live in a rather small backwater city, so Melbourne should have lots of stores.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 08, 2013 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
I understand that, I don`t like the 50 1.8 prime on the 7D, but love the 30 Sigma. The 30 is a pleasure to use and its a useful focal length.
Going to a shop is an option, but I think I need to borrow one for a few days and put a few hundred shots through it with all my lenses.


Actually the whole 50 1.8 lens is annoying, mine shift focus depending on close or far subjects, focus accuracy is either optional, random , or non existent.

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 09, 2013 4:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Posts: 920
Location: Kanduhar, Afghanistan
I can't add much but I will be following VERY close. Right now at home I have a 550D and here in Afghanistan I have an Army 40D. My wife is budgeting $1,500 for me to do with as I please when I get home. My plan was at DigitalRev I can get a 7D, battery grip, and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (none VC) for a hair more than $1,500 which will round out my lenses nicely. But I really want to go full frame. I have seen a 6D body for sale around $1,599 but then I am left with a lens issue, I will only have my 35 f/2, 50 f/1.8, and a Tamron 70-300 that would fit the 6D and no budget for a while to get anything else. Depending on birthday cash I could possibly sneek in an 85 f/1.8 which I gues could be a nice lens lineup.

_________________
Mike "The Squirrel"
Canon 550D | Canon EF 35mm 1:2 | Canon 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 18-125mm DC OS | Tamron SP 70-300mm Di VC USD | Canon 430EX II
Military Issued Canon 40D | Canon 55-250mm IS


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2013 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 900
Location: SE Texas
My $0.02 USD: Consider the location of controls, if you will be using two cameras simultaneously, particularly if there will be action shots, and/or you will be using the rear dial frequently, or changing ISO frequently. (Some folks use auto-ISO all or most of the time.) The 7D shares ergonomics and controls with the 5D3, and to a lesser extent, the 5D2. The 6D is not only different, but controls are arranged in manner that I find confusing. I am really trying to like the 6D, with its superior low-light AF ability, but the buttons along the right top of the camera are in a different order, and the rear dial of the 6D behaves differently.

I settled upon two 7D bodies for use at work, which is mostly low-light photography. I change ISO frequently in low light! I can use my 5D and 40D cameras, without too much confusion, as the only real difference from the 7D's top buttons is the placement of the button that illuminates the top display, and the other dials and controls are largely the same. I can also use the old XTi, which does not have buttons on the top right to confuse me. If I am going to be running-and-shooting with two cameras, however, I would prefer my 7D cameras, so that everything except the lens is identical.

Of course, an alternative is to use the Q button, to bring up the quick menu, to control an unfamiliar camera. That is probably what I will do, if I decide to acquire a 6D.

_________________
Canon 7D/5D/40D/1D2N; Nikon F6, D700, FM3A, & Coolpix A; Canon 40mm 2.8 STM, 135L, 50L, 35L, 50mm 1.8 I, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 10-22mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, 400mm 5.6L; Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AI-S, 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.8D, 16mm 2.8D Fisheye, 180mm 2.8D, 100-300mm 5.6 AI-S, 18mm 2.8D, Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 SL II


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2013 12:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
Thanks RexGig, never thought about the layout of the controls. Its like the 6D is the ff version of the 60D.
I can see how that is annoying. So I need to look at a 5D III :lol:

On auto iso ,
I use auto iso a bit in Manual mode, aperture as wide open as I can get ( typically its with the long zoom so f5.6 ), leave shutterspeed at 1/1000, 1/8000 or 1/500 and then use auto iso. Main application is when chasing birds under trees where the available light constantly changes from really bright to shaded and I really need to keep shutter speed up and obviously want lens wide open.

Any thoughts on whether its worth going to ff or use lenses to achieve similar dof, basically is going to ff worth it?
Where do you see the main benefits in ff over aps-c?

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 18, 2013 12:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
Well I have made a decision, I have ordered a 6D and a 24-70 VC 2.8 Tamron to go with it. A card, uv filter and a clp.
Now just need to wait. It actually cost less than the 7D with the 15-85 when I bought it 2.5 years ago.


It will be interesting to try the 6D on my lenses and compare the results to the 7D.
Main reason I decided to go for the 6D is that it will give me more flexibility with my lenses and it has a lot of things going for it on its own right. I did contemplate the 5D III for a while, but I am sure the 6D will easily be able to do 95% of what the 5D III can do. I find it hard to justify the extra 5% for the cost involved. On top of that it does have a couple of nice extra features like GPS and wifi. Its a nice fit with the 7D as the batteries are the same and I already got a flash.


Ultimately I will always be able to add the 100D next year as a light easy body to carry around at a much smaller expense or look at some other mirorless setup.


I will also look at a wide angle lens soon and that brings up an interesting question about which one. The most obvious one is the 17-40L. But happy to look at others, any thoughts?

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2013 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
I have had a couple of days with the 6D, but haven`t got mad taking photos, as I am doing a couple of nightshifts. Hopefully on the weekend.

The one thing that is obvious is that its a bit smaller and lighter than the 7D and at first glance its almost disappointingly bare in features and the 24-70 lens is a big boy.
Using it inside in poor light was an eyeopener, it instantly locks focus indoors where the 7D would have struggled and iso 12800 jpg`s looks better than 7D`s 3200 jpgs.
That thing can see in the dark.

One of the first things I did was to get out the tripod. 7D - 70-300L on 100mm f4, iso 400 photograph a subject and then did the same with the 6D - 70-300L 160mm and f5.6 iso 400. Basically just tried to compare the output, trying keep the sensor size out of it.

Comparing jpg`s straight out of camera only, I couldn`t really tell any image quality difference even when zooming in. The only thing noticeable was that even though I was on f5.6 the dof on the ff was a tad smaller than f4 on the crop sensor. I have both sharpness tweaked up a bit and added a touch of saturation to both in camera. When I get some time to do this properly using raw and f6.3, I might post results, but don`t hold your breath if the weather is good I will be doing other things. The differences are worth spending time over :D

What is obvious and Popo and lagnificent have both mentioned this, is that your lenses behave differently. Doesn`t sound like much, but its a big deal. Its like you have doubled your lens collection. I was always frustrated with the 40-150mm focal range, as the aperture of all my zooms is somewhere between f4 and 5.6. This didn`t give me the shutterspeed, subject isolation and low light ability I was after for lanscape, portrait and action shots of my kids etc.
This is also why I love using the prime lenses on the 7D ie canon 85 1.8 and the Sigma 30 1.4. At one point I nearly bought a 50-150 2.8 from Sigma.


Now the 70-300L isn`t just a great lens for chasing wildlife on the 7D its also a great portrait lens on the 6D. The 24-70 VC 2.8 tamron on the 6D is a great low light, wideangle Landscape lens, it becomes a portrait lens on the 7D.

Essentially, having a crop sensor and a ff sensor I can actually get away with taking less gear with me. The 7D and 6D compliment each other nicely. The crop sensor is more than good enough and will still be the main camera for wildlife shots, but if you need low light performance, want a bit more dof and flexibility with all your lenses, adding a ff like the 6D makes a lot of sense.

With the 7D you have to really work at getting good indoor shot ie all the compromises ( use primes, not enough dof, slow shutterspeed, high iso noise, use flash or not etc ) , the 6D is easy. In AV mode, just pick aperture, it puts up the iso and gets focus every time, keeps the shutter speed high to avoid motion blur. Its a bit simpler to use and its a real confident camera, if that makes sense.

I think its possible to build a very good system around the crop sensor, but its not really embraced by the manufacturers, ie nobody is building a 15-50 f 1.8 or 40-120 f1.8 image stabilized lens. And what they do build specifically for a crop sensor isn`t really any smaller in size.

Oh and the wife likes it too.

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 11:55 pm
Posts: 900
Location: SE Texas
maxjj, it is good to see you are enjoying the 6D! :)

It is quite true that adding a full-frame camera does double one's lens list. I noticed this when I acquired a pre-owned 5D, after using cropped-frames for a while, and yes, indeed, DOF is notably shallower on FF. FF and crop bodies really do complement each other. Enjoy! :)

_________________
Canon 7D/5D/40D/1D2N; Nikon F6, D700, FM3A, & Coolpix A; Canon 40mm 2.8 STM, 135L, 50L, 35L, 50mm 1.8 I, 100mm 2.8L Macro, 10-22mm EF-S, 28-135 EF, 400mm 5.6L; Nikkor 50mm 1.2 AI-S, 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.8D, 16mm 2.8D Fisheye, 180mm 2.8D, 100-300mm 5.6 AI-S, 18mm 2.8D, Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 SL II


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 7:01 am
Posts: 1167
Location: bit east of Melbourne
Thanks Rex,
The 100 macro isn`t as good for macro work on the 6D and I miss the reach I get on the 70-300L with the 7D.
Still trying to get used to the various focal length and dof that comes with it.

what gets me the most is the low light performance of the new sensor.



straight out of camera jpg iso 25600. Oops could have taken a bit of a straighter picture.

Image

Image

_________________
Canon Powershot S95, Canon 6D,7D, Canon 40 2.8 STM, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Canon 17-40 L, Canon 15-85, Canon 85 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, 50mm 1.8, Canon 100 2.8L Macro, Canon 70-300L +Kenko 1.4 Pro 300DGX, Canon 430EX II and RS 4 Classic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 1:32 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:30 pm
Posts: 6953
Location: The Netherlands, Ridderkerk
ISO 256,000? I didn't even know that was a thing already. I would so much nighttime street photography and candle-lit indoor snaps...

- Bjorn

_________________
Street and documentary photographer | Google+ | Twitter

Leica M9-P (my article on Camera Labs) | Leica D-Lux 5 | 50mm Summilux


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 141
I think you got a 0 too many there Bjorn. Maxjj said ISO 25,600 not 256,000.

_________________
Camera: Nikon D60
Lenses: Nikon AF-S DX 18-55 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR, Nikon AF-S VR 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED
Flash: Nikon SB-910
Tripod: Joby Gorillapod Focus with Ball Head X, Manfrotto 055CXPRO4 with Manfrotto MH054M0-Q5 ballhead


Flickr


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:15 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:30 pm
Posts: 6953
Location: The Netherlands, Ridderkerk
Ah yes, I did. :lol: Remarkable numbers still though, my Leica only goes to ISO 2500 (and does a pretty terrible job at that value I might add). Just saw that Nikon's D4 does go up to ISO 204,800, which is also astounding.

- Bjorn

_________________
Street and documentary photographer | Google+ | Twitter

Leica M9-P (my article on Camera Labs) | Leica D-Lux 5 | 50mm Summilux


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:22 pm
Posts: 1315
Location: Speyer (Germany)
I love to use my EOS 5D Mark III up to ISO 25.600 - here's ISO 10.000: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/l ... directlink - almost without noise! Better than my 500D at 1600 ISO.

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III + Canon EOS 33v
Canon EF 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 USM + EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 50mm 1.8 II + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 2:12 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 6:30 pm
Posts: 6953
Location: The Netherlands, Ridderkerk
It's truly incredible how good some of these cameras are at high ISOs, and for photographers like me who like to shoot in low light it's an ideal feature to have. It's one of the reasons I would really like to have a Leica Monochrom, which is also pretty good in low light (see Steve Huff's review here). But, that's just a dream for now... :)

- Bjorn

_________________
Street and documentary photographer | Google+ | Twitter

Leica M9-P (my article on Camera Labs) | Leica D-Lux 5 | 50mm Summilux


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group