if you can wait, I am also waiting , the current one is not a very good lens, and its IS is really dated old tech.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I upgraded from the Rebel XTi to the 6D about a year ago, primarily because I outgrew the XTi and needed a camera that could do more. A few months after upgrading, my XTi got wet and died during a trip to Iceland so I've been looking for a 2nd camera body for my wife.
A little about my shooting style, I mostly shoot landscapes, night photography and portraits (also macro but not as much). My wife and I travel a lot, so street photography (and low light) is also part of our shooting style. I do events every now and then, but it's not my focus and is usually done at the request of family/friends. I can't say I don't like shooting fast action (sports)/wildlife because I've never really tried (I'm sure if I did I would like doing that as well). If you're interested to see photos, click here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/97429425@N05/
in your case , maybe the Sony A7 would be a great back up camera to your 6D.
A little about my gear, I have a 35L, 17-40L, 100L macro, and the 24-105L (which I'm going to sell to help pay for this new body). The 35L was the last lens I bought, and I realized I liked shooting with primes over zooms. My wife is the opposite, she likes the versatility of zooms.
Anyway, I'm down to 3 different cameras, the 70d, 5D Mark iii, or another 6d. Price is definitely a consideration, but I'd rather spend a little more (or a lot) to get the right camera. I've looked at enough spec reviews and sample photos to know the difference among all 3 cameras. My shooting style screams 6d (and the fact that I really love my current 6d), however my wife's shooting style is suited more for the 70d. She really wants the rotating screen, and I think the new touch screen focus system of the 70d is a major advantage. Also, she isn't into learning the technical side of photography as I am, so having a 70d that has a few advanced features but is simple to use is also a plus. I think the 7fps of the 70d would only get used every once in a great while. For me the 5diii is still under consideration (in that case, my wife would use my 6d), but it does cost an arm and a leg. I'm not going to get into the 5diii specs, but there are times when I'm shooting where I could benefit from some of the 5diii's capabilities.
That being said, I was interested in getting user opinions on real world shooting, not a spec comparison. Thanks ahead of time for your thoughts!
why is it that the sony a7 and a7r have the same sync speeds as most common SLR's? I ask you directly because you seem to beleive these new systems are the template for all that is good in the world, why is it that with no mirror the zync speeds are still low? And I am talking flash on camera, not even off camera. shouldn't that be one of those benefits to ditching the mirror?
The mirror is gone, but the mechanical shutter is still there…and it's the shutter that imposes the Xsync limitation (shortest duration where the sensor is completely exposed - above Xsync both curtains are traveling across the sensor in a 'rolling' slit).
Aside from the "generic problem" of a mechanical shutter, Sony's greedy and shortsighted (!) choice of A) whimpy battery and B) crappy mechanical shutter unit [noise, lots of vibration, bad X-sync] for the A7R seriously degrades what would otherwise have been a truely amazing camera. Unfortunately. Shutter situation in A7 is somewhat better since it has an electronic "first curtain" and 1/250s X-sync as opposed to only 1/160s for A7R.
Much shorter X-sync times are one of the reasons why I am clamoring for true "solid state" mirrorless cameras, with "no moving parts whatsoever" inside. :-)
see also: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19224.msg364739#msg364739
Dear Friends and Teachers.
I have read " Fred Miranda has completed his review of the Sony A7R camera body using Canon EF lenses.
Read the full review | Sony A7R at B&H Photo" from front page of CR., and start to hit center of my heart that Why Canon not do like this too, Yes, I am waiting for Canon 3D= 36 + MP, or Canon 1DS MK IV = 36 + MP for many years already, BUT Canon do nothing like this. Yes, I check the Price of Sony Alpha a7R at B&H = $ 2,298 US Dollars + Canon EF Lens adapter = $ 350 US Dollars = Total $ 2,648 US Dollars = Super Cheap compare to Canon Top Line 1DX MK I.
Yes, Sir, My stupid question ( I have GAS./ Gear Acqisittion Syndrome Illness NOW) is= I should wait another 6-9 months to get the Canon 36 MP. or Jump the ship to buy Sony Alpha a7R now .
YES, Sir, The More I use Canon EOS-M past 3 weeks, The More I love the Size of Tiny EOS-M, and the quality of the photos of this tiny camera.---And Sony Alpha a7R ( have eye AF control like my Old Canon A2E too) is a lot smaller than Canon 1Dx too.
Thanks for your answer, Sir.
I though it would be nice to start a Topic based on favourite spots around the internet people use to help them decide, which Canon gear to get.
I found inspiration for this Topic from a post I just replied to. If this has been done before, it doesn't hurt to get get a fresh update.
To start this list is from Rienzphotoz:1. michaelthementor.com
3. Dave Dugdale's youtube channel
4. thecamerastore tv youtube channel
5. digitalrevtv youtube channel
In addition I also, follow/watch at least dozen other reviewers, infrequently.
I've added these youtube channels:
Matt Granger - (He's a Nikon guy in Canon Clothes... but his views have help me with my 70-200 purchase)
Jared Polin - If you like Kai, this guy must be his US counterpart with substance.
Dan (Learningcameras.com) - Nice and clear. Great video on Canon 5DmkIII vs 6D
Indy Mogul - Top for Indie DSLR film makers! If your into that stuff.
I too am thinking about switching to Canon. I am getting more and more into video and it would be cool to someday make the transition to something like the C100 seamlessly.
Not sure my reasons are totally logical though. Nikon has been screwing up badly with the D600 and then not acknowledging the issues even exist. Plus most video guys are already using Canon or Panny
What kind of loss would I take by switching though? The thought of taking a huge loss on my D800 and all my glass keeps me with Nikon for now.
Based on DXO tests (i.e. "on paper"), no, the 1D X high ISO is theoretically the same as the D4. However, from a visual standpoint, I've seen ISO 16000 images and even some ISO 51200 sports images from a 1D X that simply blow me away...similar images from the D4 just don't engender the same feeling of low noise and clean quality.
That is because the DXO tests are CRAP. What a "sensor" rating is versus the pictures produced and the capabilities of the bodies are two VERY different things
Which would your want - Nikon D600 or Nikon D4 as a pro camera... According to DXO marks, the "sensor" on the D600 is close to 10% better than the D4.
As an aside, I think it's particularly weird that people feel the need to accuse Mr. Kelby of somehow "selling out" or being dishonest because he likes Canon cameras and is saying so.
No one is accusing anyone because no crime has been committed.
Mr Kelby is a well known photography expert, and as such his words have more impact than mine, yours, this whole forum put together. He is a living ad machine: companies know it and so does he. So I guess it's smart to at least wonder if he might have untold reasons for declaring this or that. Same as Ken Rockwell is not, by and large, considered the most unbiased reviewer.
The whole thing depends on how likely you think it is that Mr Kelby never got a chance to play with a 1Dx before 6 months ago, then it was love at first sight. For all his talk about ergonomy, skin tones and UI, I would say with any Canon camera at all, actually. How likely it is that someone like him has to "switch system" instead of just adding Canon gear to his Nikon kit. And please mind the fact that switching means making a mutually-exclusive choice. It's either this or that.
I believe he has been using Canon and Nikon stuff, and probably also Sony, Leica and whatnot (he is a gear geek by his own admission) for a long time. In the past he had reasons to present himself as a Nikon guy, now he has reasons to claim a "switch" to Canon. All fine for him, but let's try not to infer universal photographic truths out of this.
Boy, there's some SERIOUS hate and bickering in this thread.
If you honestly believe this is true, I think you must have been born and raised in Disneyland.
What I see are people saying what they think, and that's a fine thing. Thanks to good mods and posters, we don't have actual flame wars here.
If someone's opinion offends you, deal with it.
no need to be so hard on the guy since most of us actually use more than one camera systems here.
I mean no need the "born and raised in Disneyland" comment.
No one goes through this world without being offended. Life is about being offended. How you cope with it determines how successful, happy you are.
One thing I'd ask: If Kelby is so smart, why did it take him so long to figure out that Canon is superior? And another, why did it take Canon so long to get in the game and recruit him?