For image quality, which would you prefer/recommend: 6D (FF & low-light capability) with a 1.4X converter or the new 7D2 (at native resolution, without a converter).
I have the 300/4L, 135/2L & 50/1.4 - it is the 50mm performance that I am most interested in (70mm @ 2.0 with converter, versus effective 80mm @ 1.4).
Short story:
I have the 7D and will almost certainly upgrade to the 7D2. I mostly use the 135L lens, although the 300 would be more useful to me on FF than it is at the moment. I find the 7D/300 combo limiting due to the lighting situation, and believe the 7D2 would give a significant improvement for my typical use.
If I buy the 7D2, I will sell the 7D, but I am also considering the 6D "at some stage". What are your thoughts?
Long story:
I used to have numerous items of 35mm kit, including AE-1, AV-1 & various typical and mediocre lenses. My former favourite was the T90 & 85/1.8 prime. I am fairly used to judging my required shot with a prime, rather than a zoom.
Having moved up through various digital models, including early 'point & shoot' to the 20D & 7D, I am now looking for my final camera body. I've rented the 5D3, and would love a 1Dx, but have ruled that out financially.
As for lenses, I thought I wanted the 400/2.8L, but after using it, I know it's too big. The 200/2.0L was also on 'the list', but again is too bulky. My future lens purchases are now probably the 35/1.4L (for FF) or temporarily the new EF-S 24/2.8. The 70-200/2.8 non-IS is also a possibility.
Based on my existing lenses, and possibly the wish list, which combination will give me the best quality images: the 6D with converter, or the 7D2? I've ruled out the 2.0X, the 5D3 and most other zooms/primes. Having two bodies offers an advantage, and I realise there are other considerations (AF being the main one).
Maybe the question should be, which do I buy first: the 6D or the 7D2? I know the 7D is more suited to my typical shoot.
Many thanks.
I have the 300/4L, 135/2L & 50/1.4 - it is the 50mm performance that I am most interested in (70mm @ 2.0 with converter, versus effective 80mm @ 1.4).
Short story:
I have the 7D and will almost certainly upgrade to the 7D2. I mostly use the 135L lens, although the 300 would be more useful to me on FF than it is at the moment. I find the 7D/300 combo limiting due to the lighting situation, and believe the 7D2 would give a significant improvement for my typical use.
If I buy the 7D2, I will sell the 7D, but I am also considering the 6D "at some stage". What are your thoughts?
Long story:
I used to have numerous items of 35mm kit, including AE-1, AV-1 & various typical and mediocre lenses. My former favourite was the T90 & 85/1.8 prime. I am fairly used to judging my required shot with a prime, rather than a zoom.
Having moved up through various digital models, including early 'point & shoot' to the 20D & 7D, I am now looking for my final camera body. I've rented the 5D3, and would love a 1Dx, but have ruled that out financially.
As for lenses, I thought I wanted the 400/2.8L, but after using it, I know it's too big. The 200/2.0L was also on 'the list', but again is too bulky. My future lens purchases are now probably the 35/1.4L (for FF) or temporarily the new EF-S 24/2.8. The 70-200/2.8 non-IS is also a possibility.
Based on my existing lenses, and possibly the wish list, which combination will give me the best quality images: the 6D with converter, or the 7D2? I've ruled out the 2.0X, the 5D3 and most other zooms/primes. Having two bodies offers an advantage, and I realise there are other considerations (AF being the main one).
Maybe the question should be, which do I buy first: the 6D or the 7D2? I know the 7D is more suited to my typical shoot.
Many thanks.