Canon competition to D610+14-24 f/2.8

[David - Sydney]

Not clickbait... hear me out...

I have been a decades long user of Canon. Currently 7D/10-22mm, 24-105 f/4, 70-200mm f/2.8II
7D is wearing out and I am getting to its limits (IMHO). So... what to replace it with.
Night/astro/landscape is where I mostly use my 10-22mm lens and publish. Looking for high ISO/low noise... full frame and wider aperture would be ideal. Something to last for a long time would be ideal ie not getting previous generation equipment.

I have finally considered all options now I think:
7DmkII has great AF/video but not as good noise as 6D and is $100 more
6D has the best noise for Canon but poor AF. At least another year before replacement
5DmkIII is a great all rounder but is much more expensive and noise is on par with 7DmkII as far as I know
A7x has better noise but poor AF and mostly need 3rd party lens
Nikon 610 has better noise, good AF, high frame rate, dual slots, etc

Canon 16-35mm f/4 is a great lens but f/2.8 would be better. Wider would be a bonus
Canon 16-35 f/2.8 II doesn't have the sharpness/coma/ etc as the f/4 version. Replacement end-2016?
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 is well known as a great lens. Used on A7xx/Canon users using adaptors (without AF)
Canon 11-24mm is awesome but still f/4 and crazy price

In Australia, I can get
6D+16-35mm f/4 is ~USD2560 (USD2270 grey market) old body, new lens
6D+16-35mm f/2.8II is ~USD3030 (USD2730 grey market) old body, old lens
D610+14-24mm f/2.8 is ~USD3200 (USD2880 grey market). Body/lens stable in market (price, quality etc)

I'm open to suggestions.... I am being too fussy but it is a big step for me either way.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmarriottsydney/

 

[donn]

It seems you're not into action photography so I would suggest 6D and the 16-35 F4 IS. It sounds like the 16-35 might be slow at F4, but it has IS. Plus, the 6D performs good at high iso.

 

[drjlo]

What subject do you plan to shoot? That would decide what would make most sense; however, seeing the wide angle lenses mentioned, I'm guessing landscapes and non-fast moving subjects at most. If so, I'm quite happy with A7r+Canon 16-35 F4 IS.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Not clickbait... hear me out...

I have been a decades long user of Canon. Currently 7D/10-22mm, 24-105 f/4, 70-200mm f/2.8II
7D is wearing out and I am getting to its limits (IMHO). So... what to replace it with.
Night/astro/landscape is where I mostly use my 10-22mm lens and publish. Looking for high ISO/low noise... full frame and wider aperture would be ideal. Something to last for a long time would be ideal ie not getting previous generation equipment.

I have finally considered all options now I think:
7DmkII has great AF/video but not as good noise as 6D and is $100 more
6D has the best noise for Canon but poor AF. At least another year before replacement
5DmkIII is a great all rounder but is much more expensive and noise is on par with 7DmkII as far as I know
A7x has better noise but poor AF and mostly need 3rd party lens
Nikon 610 has better noise, good AF, high frame rate, dual slots, etc

Canon 16-35mm f/4 is a great lens but f/2.8 would be better. Wider would be a bonus
Canon 16-35 f/2.8 II doesn't have the sharpness/coma/ etc as the f/4 version. Replacement end-2016?
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 is well known as a great lens. Used on A7xx/Canon users using adaptors (without AF)
Canon 11-24mm is awesome but still f/4 and crazy price

In Australia, I can get
6D+16-35mm f/4 is ~USD2560 (USD2270 grey market) old body, new lens
6D+16-35mm f/2.8II is ~USD3030 (USD2730 grey market) old body, old lens
D610+14-24mm f/2.8 is ~USD3200 (USD2880 grey market). Body/lens stable in market (price, quality etc)

I'm open to suggestions.... I am being too fussy but it is a big step for me either way.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmarriottsydney/

Nikon seems to turn out a minor update to their FF bodies every Year., Check the price for their lenses as well. Then, they charge extra for things included with your Canon camera, and, if you use live view, Nikon is pretty awful.

The 5D MK III has far less noise than a 7D MK II, but a tad more than a 6D.

I'm not sure why you think the 6D has poor AF. It has less points, but for your stated use, autofocus is not a issue in any event.

Lenses are where you need to plan for long term use, bodies change relatively frequently and there is always another coming out.

You also need to consider service and support.

Be very careful about evaluating cameras based on specifications, you can get bit.

 

[NorbR]

Can't go wrong with the 6D and 16-35 f/4L IS combination.
If astro/nightscape photography is important, consider the Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC instead.

 

[lholmes549]

Assuming from your post that your main uses will be night/astro/landscape:

I was in pretty much the exact same position a year ago as you are now. I had 7D, Sigma 10-20, 24-105 f/4L, 70-200 f/4L and wanted to make the jump to full frame for better high ISO and overall IQ as I had started focusing on land/sea/nightscapes.

A year on (almost exactly) I've ended up with Canon 6D, Samyang 14mm f/2.8, Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS and still have the 24-105 and 70-200.

I decided this set up was right for me because I rarely, if ever, require anything beyond standard AF performance and shoot in MF for all landscape work on a tripod. That said, the centre AF point is great on the 6D. Noise performance and IQ are great, I couldn't justify 5D3 no matter how much I wanted to.

Instead I spent the money on 14mm for nightscapes and the 16-35mm more recently for general landscapes.
I pretty much always use the 16-35 at f/8 or above so the f/2.8 would be a waste for me; when I'm shooting the stars and need f/2.8 I'm using the 14mm for the FOV anyway.

Bottom line is you just have to decide for yourself based on your uses. For me, Canons lens and body line up doesn't give me reason to switch to Nikon, even though a 14-24mm f/2.8 would be lovely.

If you're shooting landscapes and looking to do so on a budget, 6D + 16-35 F/4 all the way, and I highly recommend the Samyang 14mm.

Here's a recent shot of the Aurora from here in Ireland using 6D+14mm.

 

[mangobutter]

I'd go 6D/Tamron 15-30 2.8 VC. If you must have Canon and 2.8, then the 16-35 is obvious. I've owned the 16-35 2.8 Canon (Version II) before and it is extremely sharp wide open (center and midframe)! Of course its corners are nothing to write home about but all the online reviewer hype is blown out of proportion. In real world use its not a deal breaker. I own the 16-35 F4 IS now. It's a great lens of course but you seem to need/want 2.8. I sometimes think about trading my 16-35 F4 IS for a Tamron 15-30... but the downside is size, weight, and bulbous front element. For wide 2.8 purposes, I have my Samyang 14.

 

[Sporgon]

Some lovely work there; I think you'll find a decent jump forward with any FF for landscape type work. I don't see you putting much strain on the AF system, or f/2.8 for that matter.

So you'd be saving $800 with the 6D + remarkable 16-35 IS, but in the end it's down to personal preference, nothing more.

 

[neuroanatomist]

+1 for the 6D + Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.8.

 

[tron]

My favourite astro equipment is 5DMkIII + Canon EF14mm 2.8L II.

During a walk I saw a used Canon EF14mm 2.8L II in a shop window.

I asked for a possibility of a part exchange and I got a positive answer.

So finally it cost me around 700 euros. I took it and enjoy it since then.

 

[phuangk]

+1 to Canon 6D + Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14mm F/2.8 UMC
I use my Samyang 14mm F/2.8 for Aurora/Milkyway shooting and use 16-35mm F/4L for other landscape shooting.

 

[tron]

@phuangk: Nice photos and nice place! Where exactly did you take these pictures?

 

[Nelu]

5DmkIII is a great all rounder but is much more expensive and noise is on par with 7DmkII as far as I know

Well, I`m afraid you are wrong here. The 5D Mark III is in a different league than the 7D Mark II.
Yes, it is more expansive but you get what you pay for.

Nelu

 

[phuangk]

@phuangk: Nice photos and nice place! Where exactly did you take these pictures?

Took those photos @ Yellowknife, NWT, Canada.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

It seems you're not into action photography so I would suggest 6D and the 16-35 F4 IS. It sounds like the 16-35 might be slow at F4, but it has IS. Plus, the 6D performs good at high iso.

+1, I actually second this opinion

 

[Hjalmarg1]

Can't go wrong with the 6D and 16-35 f/4L IS combination.
If astro/nightscape photography is important, consider the Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC instead.

Yeah, Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC is a great option for astrophotography as per some reviews and a a little wider than Canon ones.

 

[tron]

Can't go wrong with the 6D and 16-35 f/4L IS combination.
If astro/nightscape photography is important, consider the Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC instead.

Yeah, Tamron 15-30/2.8 VC is a great option for astrophotography as per some reviews and a a little wider than Canon ones.

Well, not wider than 14 2.8L II. As for being wider than the 16-35 sure. But its front element is more like the 14mm 2.8. It is a bulbous one which is a flare magnet that cannot be protected by hood (from side lights, an annoyance to astrophotography). But, I agree that it is a general purpose wide angle zoom that can be used in astrophotography too.

 

[David - Sydney]

Hi Guys. Appreciate your comments and thoughts.

To answer some questions.. I don't publish my sports/karate/indoor event shots but do share them with my friends etc via drop box. The AF is important from that perspective but the 7D/70-200mm (sometimes with 1.4x) would still manage this using my 7D until the shutter starts to cark it.

Looks like the consensus (and the right approach) is for
=> 6D + 16-35mm f/4 for general landscape where I use f/9-11 normally.
Benefit is also 77mm filters mean that i can keep my current set of filters

People swear by the 14mm f/2.8 Samyang and yet I see a lot of discussion about quality and calibration eg. returning it to be fixed and/or manually calibrating it yourself especially for infinity focusing. Then again, for the price and for astro it makes sense to just get it. 2 lens then but still cheaper than switching OEM.

If I used the Samyang/14-24mm Nikon + adpator/Tamron 15-30/11-24mm Canon for general landscape with high DR I will need to invest in a new set of filters (Fotodiox/Lee/Cokin/etc) due to their shape. This could be another step in the future but 6D low noise should help with pushing in post in the meantime.

 

[lholmes549]

If I used the Samyang/14-24mm Nikon + adpator/Tamron 15-30/11-24mm Canon for general landscape with high DR I will need to invest in a new set of filters (Fotodiox/Lee/Cokin/etc) due to their shape. This could be another step in the future but 6D low noise should help with pushing in post in the meantime.

I don't think you're likely to need filters for the 14mm if you have a good filter kit for the 16-35. When I got my 16-35 f/4 I invested in the Lee System and some of the Formatt-Hitech Firecrest filters, and I haven't yet felt like I was missing anything with the 16-35 and filters that I could have got better with the 14mm and filters.

The reality is that investing in a filter set up to accommodate the 14mm is going to get pretty expensive, so it's up to you to balance if it's worth it. Of course if you have a Nikon 14-24 then it makes sense to get a filter set up that works with it, but accommodating filter set ups for both 14mm samyang and the 16-35 could get pricey.

I bought the samyang filter holder for the 14mm and one ND8 grad, but I have yet to use it as it's so large it's extra hassle to carry. Much more convenient using the Lee system on the 16-35.

 

[jeffa4444]

I have the Canon 6D with the EF 16-35mm f4L IS. Ive always been happy predominately with the 6D performance I mainly shoot landscape but I do shoot airshows and had no issues with the 6D that would change the decision again today. The EF 16-35mm f4L well what else is their to say about it the lens is outstanding and Im more than happy with its performance on the 6D.