5Diii or 6D coming from a 5Dii, and a lens to complicate the decision

[JoaoPedro]

Hello 5Diii and 6D users =) I would like to hear opinions on the following.

I've been wanting to upgrade my 5Dii because I've always struggled to get satisfiable results at high ISO (I mean noise and image sharpness), and I shoot in low light situations at weddings (churches in Europe are a bit dark, and I have to go to ISO 3200 most of the times, that being the limit, and I don't use flash in churches). For this upgrade what interests me is to have good to very good results at ISO 6400, that's my main objective. From your experience, is the 6D better than the 5Diii at 6400 or 12800? Are images at such high ISO usable?

I got used to work around the 5Dii AF limitations, but having missed shots when using the outer AF points always or because I had to recompose while shooting with the center point annoyed me, and still does, so I would like to have better AF. I think would take advantage of the 5Diii AF system and I'm afraid of, after a while shooting with it, becoming anger at those 10 non-crossed AF points in the 6D. So, 6D users, please advise on this particular subject, please.

My current kit is: 5Dii, 7D, 550D (all with battery grips), 16-35ii, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 70-200 non-IS, two 430EXii.

Here are my options:
- Buy the 6D and 70-200ii IS, sell the 5Dii, the 7D (i really don't like how it performs above ISO 1600, and I think the 550D RAW files are better) and the 70-200 non-IS, spending a total of +/- 800EUR.
- Buy the 5Diii, sell my 5Dii and the 7D, and keep my 70-200 non-IS, spending a total of +/- 900EUR.
- keep the 5Dii, sell the 7D and the 70-200 non IS, and buy the 70-200ii IS, spending +/-250EUR.

If money didn't matter I would buy the 5Diii and the 70-200ii IS. But money matters. And one of the questions here is: can the high ISO on the 5Diii allow me to produce sharp images with the 70-200 non-IS, since it will allow me to go up in ISO while maintaining a 1/200 shutter speed? Or is it better to go with the 6D (with its shortcomings regarding AF) for the high ISO and add the 70-200ii IS, which is a razor sharp lens? Or will I keep my 5Dii for one more year and go for the 70-200ii IS while living with the missed shots and the noisy images at ISO 3200?

Thanks.

 

[luciolepri]

I didn't use the 6D a lot, so other users will be more helpful, anyway:

- The central AF point of the 6D is great in low light, it outperforms the 5D MKIII, but only the central one.
- The AF performances of the MKIII are substantially better than the 5D MKII. And the AF area is much wider, with many more cross-type AF points.
- The ISO performances of the 5D MKIII and the 6D are pretty much equal. If you expose properly, you can get good images (with a little bit of post processing, of course) even at 3200 ISO. At 6400-12800 ISO, you're pushing the sensor at its limits, so you can't expect miracles... Personally, I find the MKIII to have a better color rendition at high ISO than the 6D, but many people desagree, so... take it "cum grano salis".
- The MKIII is a camera with improved video skills, it has a strong anti-aliasing filter: both the 6D and the MKII deliver much sharper images.

All in all, I suggest you to get the MKIII.

That's all I got!

 

[Loswr]

If you don't feel you've missed shots due to the AF of the 5DII, then the 6D will be fine. But, you indicated that you feel limited by the AF of the 5DII...and in that case, I'd recommend getting the 5DIII - the 6D's AF is better than the 5DII, but it's not a dramatic improvement such as you'll get with the 5DIII (which is far better than the 7D's AF, as well).

 

[mackguyver]

I'd go for your first option:
Buy the 6D and 70-200ii IS, sell the 5Dii, the 7D (i really don't like how it performs above ISO 1600, and I think the 550D RAW files are better) and the 70-200 non-IS, spending a total of +/- 800EUR.

The 70-200 II is an amazing lens, and should work very well for your type of photos. The 6D's AF should be fine for anything other than sports or moving wildlife (i.e. action) photography and the center point is 1 stop more sensitive in low light. I sold my 7D and kept my 5DII when I purchased the 5DIII. The 7D never impressed me in terms of file quality at ISO 1600 or above and the AF was good, but not great.

 

[agierke]

the 5D3 is your best bet. i am a wedding shooter and experienced in dealing with the low light scenarios + AF challenges of the 5D2. the 5D3 handles high ISO very well and the AF opens up all kinds of possibilities by eliminating the frustrating results of focus and recompose.

the 6D would continue your AF frustrations in the circumstances you are talking about.

oh, and i use the 70-200 non IS and it handles superbly on the 5D3. the IS v2 would be nice....but the non IS is still a superb lens that gets great results for me.

 

[wsgroves]

I am just going to add a little tidbit if information to the discussion that may or may not be relevant.
Ever since getting my 5d3 a few weeks ago, I have been able to almost squash my focus and recompose tendency due to all the focus points. I am finding that I have a lot more keepers then before. I am sure it could be the camera as well, I just thought I would throw that out there.
Also, my 24-105 lens does not look as good on my 5d3 as it does my 7D.

 

[Kernuak]

Here are a couple of 100% crops for you to compare to what you get now, both taken with the 5D MkIII when I was still testing out its limits. The first was purely to test its ability to focus in low light. It was too dark for me to focus manually, ISO 12800, f/4, 1/250, 300 f/2.8 + 1.4x extender. As you can see, it successfully focused, although the sharpness is reduced due to the high ISO and noise. Second was ISO 3200, f/13, 1/500, 100mm macro (non-IS), handheld. Both are unprocessed RAW files.

 

[captainkanji]

The 6D is great in low light. I only have issues when shooting action sports. Up to 6400 is great, 12800 is ok with some NR. If I could afford it, I would have purchased the 5D3. The 6D center point is like a tractor beam and works fantastic in darkness, but all the others are useless in low light IMO. It is not a problem unless zoomed in for a tight portrait where composition can be an issue. The 6D is better than the 5D2 in most aspects, but the 5D3 is better still.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

You are certainly not going to get significantly better high ISO or sharpness from a 5D MK III or a 6D.

While the 5D MK III and 6D do not lose quality as fast at the extreme high ISO settings over 6400, there is no discernible gain at 6400 or below.

Sharpenss isn't a factor at all.

If your 5D MK II is not getting sharp images, its a lens or user issue, or perhaps the camera has a focus problem or damaged lens mount.

I've had two 5D MK II*'s and two 5D MK III's.

For example, here is a image shot on one of my 5D MK II's at ISO 6400. My MK III will not do any better at 6400. Neither did my D800. At extreme high ISO settings, there is only imcremental progress and the shallow DR is the biggest issue, exposures must be perfect.

 

[Kernuak]

You are certainly not going to get significantly better high ISO or sharpness from a 5D MK III or a 6D.

While the 5D MK III and 6D do not lose quality as fast at the extreme high ISO settings over 6400, there is no discernible gain at 6400 or below.

Sharpenss isn't a factor at all.

If your 5D MK II is not getting sharp images, its a lens or user issue, or perhaps the camera has a focus problem or damaged lens mount.

I've had two 5D MK II*'s and two 5D MK III's.

For example, here is a image shot on one of my 5D MK II's at ISO 6400. My MK III will not do any better at 6400. Neither did my D800. At extreme high ISO settings, there is only imcremental progress and the shallow DR is the biggest issue, exposures must be perfect.

I would actually say that ISO 6400 on my MkIII is similar to ISO 2500 on my MKII. I certainly wouldn't have pushed my MkII to 6400, like I do with my MkIII. Single shot AF on the MkII was accurate enough in low light on the centre point, but I would say my MkIII is a little better, plus it is just as accurate on the outer points and works with AI Servo in low light.

 

[Drizzt321]

You are certainly not going to get significantly better high ISO or sharpness from a 5D MK III or a 6D.

While the 5D MK III and 6D do not lose quality as fast at the extreme high ISO settings over 6400, there is no discernible gain at 6400 or below.

Sharpenss isn't a factor at all.

If your 5D MK II is not getting sharp images, its a lens or user issue, or perhaps the camera has a focus problem or damaged lens mount.

I've had two 5D MK II*'s and two 5D MK III's.

For example, here is a image shot on one of my 5D MK II's at ISO 6400. My MK III will not do any better at 6400. Neither did my D800. At extreme high ISO settings, there is only imcremental progress and the shallow DR is the biggest issue, exposures must be perfect.

I would actually say that ISO 6400 on my MkIII is similar to ISO 2500 on my MKII. I certainly wouldn't have pushed my MkII to 6400, like I do with my MkIII. Single shot AF on the MkII was accurate enough in low light on the centre point, but I would say my MkIII is a little better, plus it is just as accurate on the outer points and works with AI Servo in low light.

Given that photo, I wouldn't say it's a low light situation. At least not on the main subjects, they appear fairly well lit, although not like you'd have with strobes or during the day of course. Have you tried the same in truly dim lighting, such as a bar or something? I find that the 5d3 does better at 6400 than the 5d2 does at 3200.

 

[Marsu42]

While the 5D MK III and 6D do not lose quality as fast at the extreme high ISO settings over 6400, there is no discernible gain at 6400 or below.

That depends on if you think a "nicer" noise pattern is a plus, and the 5d3/6d noise pattern seems to be better for noise reduction vs. 5d2. But imho still no reason to update on its own. To the op: Compare yourself!

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-6d/15

I got used to work around the 5Dii AF limitations, but having missed shots when using the outer AF points always or because I had to recompose while shooting with the center point annoyed me, and still does, so I would like to have better AF. I think would take advantage of the 5Diii AF system and I'm afraid of, after a while shooting with it, becoming anger at those 10 non-crossed AF points in the 6D. So, 6D users, please advise on this particular subject, please.

If you want to use the outer points for professional purposes, get the 5d3, it's a no-brainer. Even the center point of the 6D isn't cross at f2.8, and just like on the 5d2 the outer points non-cross behavior is noticeable in everyday shooting, even though the 6D has gained some precision over the 5d2.

Last not least, this hasn't been mentioned yet: Only the 5d3 can make use of the newest Canon lenses enhanced precision and has a closed loop af system, the 6d is just a warmed up 5d2 af version that you have come to fear. Not that the 6D af wouldn't work, but if you have the choice don't rely on it.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

You are certainly not going to get significantly better high ISO or sharpness from a 5D MK III or a 6D.

While the 5D MK III and 6D do not lose quality as fast at the extreme high ISO settings over 6400, there is no discernible gain at 6400 or below.

Sharpenss isn't a factor at all.

If your 5D MK II is not getting sharp images, its a lens or user issue, or perhaps the camera has a focus problem or damaged lens mount.

I've had two 5D MK II*'s and two 5D MK III's.

For example, here is a image shot on one of my 5D MK II's at ISO 6400. My MK III will not do any better at 6400. Neither did my D800. At extreme high ISO settings, there is only imcremental progress and the shallow DR is the biggest issue, exposures must be perfect.

I would actually say that ISO 6400 on my MkIII is similar to ISO 2500 on my MKII. I certainly wouldn't have pushed my MkII to 6400, like I do with my MkIII. Single shot AF on the MkII was accurate enough in low light on the centre point, but I would say my MkIII is a little better, plus it is just as accurate on the outer points and works with AI Servo in low light.

Given that photo, I wouldn't say it's a low light situation. At least not on the main subjects, they appear fairly well lit, although not like you'd have with strobes or during the day of course. Have you tried the same in truly dim lighting, such as a bar or something? I find that the 5d3 does better at 6400 than the 5d2 does at 3200.

I take lots of low light images, I just know how to process them so they look normal, when that's called for.

There have been lots of sensor tests of the 5D MK III as well, its not any more sensitive to light, nor is it lower in noise until you get to really extreme ISO's. Then, it leaves the 5D MK II in the dust.

The above image wasn't super low in light, it was 1/125 sec at f/4 ISO 6400. I keep 1/125 sec for my 135mmL because stage productions do have a lot of movement, and the previous image seconds before was at f/2 due to the lighting changes.

Here it is, 1/125 sec f/2, ISO 6400 5D MK II. 135mm L.

This one is at 1/80 sec, f/2.8 ISO 25600 with my 24-70mm MK II and 5D MK III. It takes a lot of color correction and fooling around in PP, but when the lights are low, there isn't much choice. the subject is moving so using a long exposure is not a choice. My 5D MK II could not do this at ISO 25600.

 

[sdsr]

While I owned a 5DII I rented 5DIII and 6D and did some fairly informal comparisons in dimly lit rooms. I saw a significant difference in the unedited RAW files between the 5DII and the other two, esp. at ISO 3200 and above, not just in terms of noise but also color - at nominally the same settings, the 5DII added a slight orange glow which, if memory serves, increased with the ISO. Attractive, actually, but not accurate. The out-of-camera JPEGs were closer. Between the 6D and 5DIII the difference is fairly subtle, but it's slightly in favor of the 6D; processing may render any differences undetectable. In terms of shadow noise the 6D is clearly superior to the 5DII and 5DIII - far less banding, if any, if you need to bring out shadow detail (that's true at ISO 100 too, for that matter). In any event, the differences between the 5DII and 6D at high ISOs, and the amazing center point performance of the 6D even in almost total darkness, drove me to buy a 6D.

As for focusing, at least when photographing things that don't move, I think the difference in terms of accurate focusing between the 6D and 5DIII is exaggerated. If you're avoiding focus+recompose, obviously the more focus points the better (too bad they can't cover more of the viewfinder on any FF DSLR), especially if you need to be precisely discriminatory in what you're focusing on and the subject is fairly small. So the 5DIII wins there. I assumed that where it and the 6D had focus points in much the same place (aside from the center point) that the 5DIII would lock focus more easily, but sitting in a dimly lit room I found that the success rate wasn't much different, if at all. I can't comment on what happens if you need to focus on moving things in low light, but I imagine the consensus re the superiority of the 5DIII isn't fiction.

Any chance you can rent/borrow and see for yourself?

 

[mackguyver]

While I owned a 5DII I rented 5DIII and 6D and did some fairly informal comparisons in dimly lit rooms. I saw a significant difference in the unedited RAW files between the 5DII and the other two, esp. at ISO 3200 and above, not just in terms of noise but also color - at nominally the same settings, the 5DII added a slight orange glow which, if memory serves, increased with the ISO.

To me, the biggest difference is the amount of banding in the shadows with the 5DII. Unless mine is defective, I was really dismayed at the banding and crushed blacks when I first got my 5DII - my 60D handled dark shadows much better! Fortunately Canon has fixed that in the 5DIII and 6D.

 

[JoaoPedro]

Thanks for your feedback.
Unfortunately I can't rent the cameras (there are no renting companies here), I'll have to make a decision on trying them at the local store.

My main concern with the 6D is ending up being frustrated by the outer points AF performance. If it wasn't for that, the 6D is a total winner: much cheaper, image quality in pair or even superior to the 5D3, and I could upgrade my 70-200 as well.

The 5D3 seems the perfect bet for what can be seem as a downgrade in my kit: from two main bodies for different uses (5D2, all of my regular work; 7D, second body for extra range and a few sporting events a year) I would move to just one, the 5D3, that can do both things (keeping the 550D as a backup) and significantly upgrading high ISO image quality.

 

[JoaoPedro]

Again, 6D users, one more question.
I've been reading the 6D manual but something isn't crystal clear to me, regarding AF operation.

Can you configure the camera to select the AF point directly through the multi controller (the inner part of the rear dial), without having to press first the dedicated AF area or point button?
And how do you set the camera for an instant return to the center AF point? By pressing the SET button?

 

[Marsu42]

My main concern with the 6D is ending up being frustrated by the outer points AF performance.

If this is your main concern, you *will* get frustrated, the outer points aren't fully capable points but rather tracking helpers and a convenience for very good light conditions. With the 6D, you will have to focus & recompose, if that's not what you want then the 6D isn't for you.

I'd also rather have a 5d3, but it's nearly double the price ... fortunately I was well informed before I made the decision that the 6D is essentially a one focus point camera - and now you also know.

Can you configure the camera to select the AF point directly through the multi controller (the inner part of the rear dial), without having to press first the dedicated AF area or point button?

You can either set the af points with the multicontroller, or press the top right button and then use both wheels. Both options aren't very quick to navigate, btw.

And how do you set the camera for an instant return to the center AF point? By pressing the SET button?

No, this is not possible with the Canon firmware - and when they removed this very obvious option from SET they were probably rolling on the floor, laughing and sniggering "Just get a 5d3, you jerks!".

But this will be fixed by Magic Lantern, so SET will have a as "set af to center point" even if Canon doesn't want us to have it.