6D or 7D mkII?

[Marsu42]

I'm an amateur photographer, looking to upgrade from my T3i. I like shooting sports, but they're not all I shoot; I'm only going to have the one camera, so I'd like it to be an all-purpose choice.

The 6d isn't designed to be a all-purpose camera, and that's that. Some people find you can get away using it as such, and I also try to as I cannot afford a 5d3. But I won't stir up this discussion again here. From my experience with the 6d I can only advise: Make very sure you're fine with single-point center tracking, have high-contrast targets and don't depend on a high keeper rate.

Final option is the 70D, which didn't stop being a bad camera just because there's a 7D2. AF and noise are better than the T3i, but the other options excel in one facet of performance or the other. It also costs half as much as the 6D+24-105L or the 7D2

The 70d's sensor is only marginally better than the old 18mp crop. Sure the 70d is a nice and competent camera, even tough Magic Lantern doesn't run on it (yet). But Canon has removed spot af from the 70d so you should make sure the large af points work for what you do.

Question here really is: What are your current lenses, what's your budget?

 

[jdramirez]

I shot sports with my 60d & I primarily used my center af point...

How much cash do you have... because the t3i plus kit lens is worth $375 if you sold it...

I'd personally lean towards a 7d used for sports... maybe for $650, & a 6d for practically everything else. The best all round camera by Canon is the 5d mkiii (revised from typo before where I said mkii), and if you can't afford that, then you are stuck with two bodies

1200+650-350= $1500... otherwise. Just be happy with your t3i.

 

[candc]

I would go for the 70d. You already have a 15-85.The 70d is a very good all around camera with wifi, touch swivel screen, great dpaf live view, afma, and a pop-up flash. I never had a 7d but some posters here say the af is better on the 70d. I have the 6d, 70d, and the 7dii. I think the 70d is the best general purpose dslr you can get without going to a much more expensive body. You are going to see some really good deals next week.

 

[bholliman]

I think the 6D is a good general purpose body as long as you don't shoot a bunch of action stuff. For six months after buying my 6D I kept my 7D to use for action, but I found I hardly ever used the 7D after getting used to the IQ and high ISO performance of the 6D. I also found the 6D's AF to be more accurate than the 7D's for non sports applications. I find the non-center AF points to be useful for many situations.

The 7D2 is a great option if you really need a top notch AF system. I plan to rent one next weekend and try it at our sons high school basketball game.

 

[BJK]

Thanks to everyone who's posted thusfar. To answer some of the questions:
- Lenses: 50mm f/1.8, 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, 200mm f/2.8L, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS (non-L)
The 15-85 is my only EF-S lens...which also means I'd need to buy a new "general purpose" zoom if I did go full-frame.

- Budget: I don't really think about it in these terms, since I feel fortunate enough to have a job whereby I can justify spending $2,000.00 for something I'll use for the next 5+ years for a hobby. It is more an issue of opportunity cost -- if I buy the 6D + 24-105L over the 70D...it's about a thousand dollars I can't spend on other hobbies, or on tickets to the sporting events I like to photograph, or upgrading my other equipment.
Based on what I'm considering, my effective budget is less than the 5D3, but enough to justify the other options...so less than $2k.

- Can't sell the T3i, as it's going to a family member if / when I upgrade my camera body.
- Also can't see buying the 7D mark 1, since low light noise is one of my major concerns when upgrading. This is an example of a picture of mine that I love...but for the noise I see when putting the picture on a large monitor / HDTV. (I did take this picture before buying the 200 f/2.8L...but I haven't had a chance to shoot with the new lens in that setting.)

 

[Marsu42]

This is an example of a picture of mine that I love

For 100% crop you probably won't be happy with a 7d2+f2.8 lens either for this. The shot shows motion blur, so 1/500s was too slow for this kind of movement - and with 1/1500s you'd be still @iso6400 with the 7d2 (if the shot was properly exposed).

Question is how much magnification you're interested in, i.e. if you are ok with downsized web resolution. If not, most of your shots on flickr I just looked at don't have thin dof *and* motion, but sometimes a bit slow shutter speed. For most movement from *afar* like basketball the 6d will be fine if you're ok with loosing some shots because the af screwed up. But all other lower light shots on your flickr stream would profit a lot from thinner dof of full frame and higher iso capability. Your call

Note that rodeo with fast movement off center in lower light would be a problem for the 6d, but this is a really difficult scene and there's a reason people buy $15k pro gear like 1dx+600mm for this. With the 6d, focus & recompose you have to be ready to have a low keeper rate. With ff, you also lack the reach advantage of crop so your 200mm might be too short if you cannot get closer.

 

[tayassu]

If you shoot mostly landscapes, go for the 6D; there are way better UWA options for FF than for APS-C.
For safaris, your landscape lenses probably won't be long enough, so rent what you need.

 

[candc]

If you shoot mostly landscapes, go for the 6D; there are way better UWA options for FF than for APS-C.
For safaris, your landscape lenses probably won't be long enough, so rent what you need.

'

i don't know why people say that. there are a lot of good, reasonably priced uwa lenses for aps-c.

canon 10-18, 10-22
sigma 8-16, 10-22
tokina 11-16
tamron 10-24

 

[Marsu42]

If you shoot mostly landscapes, go for the 6D; there are way better UWA options for FF than for APS-C.

'
i don't know why people say that. there are a lot of good, reasonably priced uwa lenses for aps-c.

+1, actually uwa is the one area where aps-c excels: The mirror is smaller = the end of the ef-s lens is nearer to the sensor = you can build a better uwa for the same price since the construction is less demanding!

 

[BJK]

Question is how much magnification you're interested in, i.e. if you are ok with downsized web resolution. If not, most of your shots on flickr I just looked at don't have thin dof *and* motion, but sometimes a bit slow shutter speed. For most movement from *afar* like basketball the 6d will be fine if you're ok with loosing some shots because the af screwed up. But all other lower light shots on your flickr stream would profit a lot from thinner dof of full frame and higher iso capability. Your call

I do not disagree with you on the dof and higher ISO. Not sure I'll be able to get more dof while shooting from the cheap seats (even with the f/2.8 ), but less noise is something I would love to improve in dark settings.

It's the non-sports pictures where I think I could get more dof with a 6D...which is the way I'm leaning right now. I may try the 70-300 for baseball game or two, and decide if I like the added reach on FF (300mm as compared to the 200mm f/2.8 on FF) enough to upgrade to the L-version someday. The 200 will still be a useful lens when I shoot basketball, or when I can get closer to the field.

My keeper rate's not great with the T3i, so I don't see it being any worse with the 6D. Also, thank you for the flickr critique; I'm always looking for ways to improve.