Comparing my 60d with my new 5d3 not seeing much of a difference.

[KKCFamilyman]

I am having a hard time comparing photos at various iso's between the two in real life around the house shots any suggestions that anyone has would be great on how to test this during my return period. So far it has better color saturation and lower noise but it's still there. Maybe it's the kit lens but if so that's all I can afford right now. Ohh yeah and I do like the auto shutter speed you can set. Those who said it does not work just don't realize if the camera cannot shoot at your max set iso it will lower the shutter speed. That is a good thing. It's like people would want it not to work. Either way any good testing suggestions would be great. Also it seems like the 24-105 is really not that far of a zoom. I think if I keep it I will have to invest in a zoom before a prime.

What "Auto Shutter" are you referring to? Are you talking about "Av (Shutter Priority) Mode" because that's on your 60D as well every other modern DSLR that Canon makes. Or did I miss something new?

I was referring to being able to set the min shutter speed in av, tv and p modes because in av for example on the 60d it always jumps to 1/60 which is frustrating so I like the 1/125 and 1/250 option.

[XanuFoto]

I am having a hard time comparing photos at various iso's between the two in real life around the house shots any suggestions that anyone has would be great on how to test this during my return period.

Watch out for flying objects in your direction :-) ... seriously: the 24-105 might be a "kit" lens, but it's a very good one - so that's not your problem. And since the 5d is not an aps-c camera with "built-in" 1.6x teleconverter, it appears much shorter on full frame. And increased iso range does not mean you can shoot with f4 in the dark expecting no noise - wait another 10-20 years for that, but by then Canon will probably be bought by Sony.

If you look at your current photographic ability and your budget, you might want to consider returning the 5d3 and get a some nice lenses to experiment with focal lengths and depth of field ... after all changing lenses is part of what a dslr is about. Did I mention the 60d/5d2 runs the stellar "magic lantern" firmware addon while the 7d/5d3 does not :-p ? You can then buy the 5dx or 5d4 once it's out...

Sony is about the same size or smaller than canon and Sony has too many issues themselves. Just FYI.

[Tracy Pinto]

Sounds like the 60D was just the right camera for you. You can now buy some new glass.

[Marsu42]

Sounds like the 60D was just the right camera for you. You can now buy some new glass.

... you are about the 10-20th person to make that statement. But if I'd ever have to work in a photo store: I now can somehow identify someone who doesn't want to take advice. Pitty I didn't sell him the 5d3 for my profit :-p

[NotABunny]

The difference between the car shots is staggering, but in order to be able to extract even more perceptual information from the photos, you have to use a program that has good noise reduction algorithms (Lightroom 4 is an example).

[preppyak]

I certainly hope so.  I have a 60D and I shot flowers today at ISO 400.  The results were noisy, it did not resolve details well, etc.  I want a 5DIII if for no other reason than that I can shoot handheld at ISO 400 (or higher) without ugly noise.

Hmm, I shoot my 60D up to 800 and find the noise to not be an issue. Most of my stuff from yesterday was at ISO 400 with no noticeable noise.

Sounds like the 60D was just the right camera for you. You can now buy some new glass.

This would be really exciting news for me. I can think of a few lenses I'd love to have for $3500.

[Otter]

The 60D is a good camera.  I can't say how much of a difference you should see in image quality or if full frame is important to you along with the auto focus system ect.  You should definitely see a difference in ISO performance.  If none of this matters to you and you're really happy with your 60D, to me it seems like no brainer.  Return it, save $3500 plus and get some great L Glass!!!!

[smirkypants]

Return it, save $3500 plus and get some great L Glass!!!!

A while back Digital Rev did an interesting comparison. Same money spent, more or less. The sent a Canon 1D Mark IV against a lowly Rebel, but the 1D4 had a kit lens and the Rebel had great L glass. The Rebel STOMPED the 1D4 into the ground. I mean smashed it.

So... $3500 buys a lot of great glass. Might I suggest a Canon 70-200/2.8 II and a 24-104/f4? Or maybe 3 killer primes?

Stomped.

[KKCFamilyman]

I want to just clarify something. I either sell my 60d and 2 lenses for $2,100 which i have a buyer then pay the additional 2100 to upgrade or just spend $2100 on l glass and have my current gear continue to depreciate when i want to end up with ff anyway. Does that sway anyone's advice? Would u upgrade for the $2100?

[DCM1024]

It truly depends on what you want or need to do with your camera. If you need quality photos shot in low light with motion, get the 5d. Otherwise, keep the 60d and upgrade your glass. The 5d2 I mentioned in an earlier post belongs to my boyfriend, so I get to shoot with it if he isn't using it. I decided I couldn't afford the 5d2 plus appropriate high quality glass, so I purchased the 7d and 17-55 f2.8. It is doing a superb job for weddings, portrait, boudoir, fashion or anything else I point it at :-) I kept the Rebel as a backup. Quite frankly, my clients can't tell the difference. A mother of the bride that booked me last weekend mistook a photo that I shot in a Wal-mart restroom with an Olympus E-PM1 (budget mirrorless if you're not familiar with it) as being a wedding floral shot taken with one of my dslrs. Photography is not all about the gear. If your 60d meets your current needs, get some great l glass which will hold its value and be there when you do need to upgrade.

[DarkKnightNine]

I am having a hard time comparing photos at various iso's between the two in real life around the house shots any suggestions that anyone has would be great on how to test this during my return period. So far it has better color saturation and lower noise but it's still there. Maybe it's the kit lens but if so that's all I can afford right now. Ohh yeah and I do like the auto shutter speed you can set. Those who said it does not work just don't realize if the camera cannot shoot at your max set iso it will lower the shutter speed. That is a good thing. It's like people would want it not to work. Either way any good testing suggestions would be great. Also it seems like the 24-105 is really not that far of a zoom. I think if I keep it I will have to invest in a zoom before a prime.

What "Auto Shutter" are you referring to? Are you talking about "Av (Aperture Priority) Mode" which lets you choose the Aperture setting while the camera chooses the Shutter Speed automatically, because that's on your 60D as well every other modern DSLR that Canon makes. Or did I miss something new?

[KKCFamilyman]

It truly depends on what you want or need to do with your camera. If you need quality photos shot in low light with motion, get the 5d. Otherwise, keep the 60d and upgrade your glass. The 5d2 I mentioned in an earlier post belongs to my boyfriend, so I get to shoot with it if he isn't using it. I decided I couldn't afford the 5d2 plus appropriate high quality glass, so I purchased the 7d and 17-55 f2.8. It is doing a superb job for weddings, portrait, boudoir, fashion or anything else I point it at :-) I kept the Rebel as a backup. Quite frankly, my clients can't tell the difference. A mother of the bride that booked me last weekend mistook a photo that I shot in a Wal-mart restroom with an Olympus E-PM1 (budget mirrorless if you're not familiar with it) as being a wedding floral shot taken with one of my dslrs. Photography is not all about the gear. If your 60d meets your current needs, get some great l glass which will hold its value and be there when you do need to upgrade.

Ok now I just shot low light in my front room of my family. The canon 60d was hard to get a good focus point on the eye with two active twins moving around and also I was shooting with the 17-55 in av at f5 since there was three people in the shot I wanted them all in focus. I feel 2.8 is too shallow. Anyway I was able to grab them with the 5d3 with more focus point options and the af expansion helps also. finally I can boost the iso comfortably and reduce the noise in lightroom and get shots  that the 60d physically is incapable of unless I bring in more light like a speedlite which I try to avoid. I like natural light photo's. I feel the 5d3 gives a lot more to bring back and has a more accurate white balance in low light vs the 60d. I found myself doing a lot less adjustments but if adding glass is the consensus then I will. Everyone just kept saying I was wasting $4200 but actually I will be able to get rid of the 60d and just pay $2,100 and with the lower light needs I was wondering if now was a good time since the 24-105 is turning out to be an ok lens and and it will fill a immediate need for lower noise higher iso performance. Either way I know that even shooting at 25,600 does not mean I don't need a flash but I could shoot at say 6400 with a lot less fill flash than 1600 on my 60d.

[DCM1024]

Good for you - you have made a decision, so now go for it. I promise you that I would buy the 5d3 and appropriate lenses if I had the $$$

[DCM1024]

Good tests would be fashion runway shows, weddings, live performances at sundown, etc.

[Daniel Flather]

  I have attached on shot showing how bad the vignetting is without the correction. 

In an ironic twist, that bad vignetting is one thing I love about my jump from a crop to a full frame. My new 24L's vignetting is severe and awesome.