6D vs. 600D with good lenses?

[ecka]

I regret that I didn't start with a FF camera. I didn't know what to get, so I tried to follow the most popular advice for beginners, which was/is like:
- body doesn't matter, half-dead Rebel is fine ; (not for me)
- get the best lenses you can afford ...; (best doesn't mean the most expensive)
- ... which are 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200L, 100-400L; (not really, primes work better for me)
- don't forget about accessories: tripods, flashes, filters, etc; (you can buy these later, if you feel the need) (IMHO, only memory cards, bags and spare batteries are the must-have, everything else is optional).
Now I know that it does not fit my style. I don't need to cover the 16-600mm focal range. I rarely use tele lenses, flashes, tripods, filters ... no need to spend money on that. I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II and then add 85/1.8USM later (which I recommend for portraits).
The problem is that you never know before you try it. My current choice is 6D+40/2.8STM (people, close-ups, stitching landscapes, travel) +150/2.8Macro for portraits and stuff outdoors.

 

[Zv]

I regret that I didn't start with a FF camera. I didn't know what to get, so I tried to follow the most popular advice for beginners, which was/is like:
- body doesn't matter, half-dead Rebel is fine ; (not for me)
- get the best lenses you can afford ...; (best doesn't mean the most expensive)
- ... which are 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200L, 100-400L; (not really, primes work better for me)
- don't forget about accessories: tripods, flashes, filters, etc; (you can buy these later, if you feel the need) (IMHO, only memory cards, bags and spare batteries are the must-have, everything else is optional).
Now I know that it does not fit my style. I don't need to cover the 16-600mm focal range. I rarely use tele lenses, flashes, tripods, filters ... no need to spend money on that. I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II and then add 85/1.8USM later (which I recommend for portraits).
The problem is that you never know before you try it. My current choice is 6D+40/2.8STM (people, close-ups, stitching landscapes, travel) +150/2.8Macro for portraits and stuff outdoors.

+1. Find your style first before buying all that extra stuff. You may find that you use a filter about once a year. Don't buy anything until you find a definite need for it. Try without it. You might find a cheap workaround. For example grad ND - I find lightrooms grad filter way more flexible or take two exposures and blend in photoshop. For ND filter - f/22 does the job (well kind of!). Maybe a CPL is one you will need as thats not possible to replicate digitally. Tripod - my knee, lampost, railing etc. even used someones shoulder once.

When you catagorically cannot go further - then buy it.

 

[verysimplejason]

I regret that I didn't start with a FF camera. I didn't know what to get, so I tried to follow the most popular advice for beginners, which was/is like:
- body doesn't matter, half-dead Rebel is fine ; (not for me)
- get the best lenses you can afford ...; (best doesn't mean the most expensive)
- ... which are 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200L, 100-400L; (not really, primes work better for me)
- don't forget about accessories: tripods, flashes, filters, etc; (you can buy these later, if you feel the need) (IMHO, only memory cards, bags and spare batteries are the must-have, everything else is optional).
Now I know that it does not fit my style. I don't need to cover the 16-600mm focal range. I rarely use tele lenses, flashes, tripods, filters ... no need to spend money on that. I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II and then add 85/1.8USM later (which I recommend for portraits).
The problem is that you never know before you try it. My current choice is 6D+40/2.8STM (people, close-ups, stitching landscapes, travel) +150/2.8Macro for portraits and stuff outdoors.

+1. Find your style first before buying all that extra stuff. You may find that you use a filter about once a year. Don't buy anything until you find a definite need for it. Try without it. You might find a cheap workaround. For example grad ND - I find lightrooms grad filter way more flexible or take two exposures and blend in photoshop. For ND filter - f/22 does the job (well kind of!). Maybe a CPL is one you will need as thats not possible to replicate digitally. Tripod - my knee, lampost, railing etc. even used someones shoulder once.

When you catagorically cannot go further - then buy it.

I can agree to almost anything except FLASH. I consider flash as one of the most important accessory besides lens and camera. You can use it as a fill-in flash which makes portraits a lot better. It's also a great help for extending a little bit a picture's DR. I can live without a tripod (most of the time) and filters but I consider flash as a must whenever I take pictures except for some situations. You may argue that 6D can take a much higher ISO but when you know how to use your flash properly, your pictures will be a lot better.

 

[Zv]

VSJ - Ok yeah that's true I can't live without a speedlight!

 

[ecka]

I regret that I didn't start with a FF camera. I didn't know what to get, so I tried to follow the most popular advice for beginners, which was/is like:
- body doesn't matter, half-dead Rebel is fine ; (not for me)
- get the best lenses you can afford ...; (best doesn't mean the most expensive)
- ... which are 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200L, 100-400L; (not really, primes work better for me)
- don't forget about accessories: tripods, flashes, filters, etc; (you can buy these later, if you feel the need) (IMHO, only memory cards, bags and spare batteries are the must-have, everything else is optional).
Now I know that it does not fit my style. I don't need to cover the 16-600mm focal range. I rarely use tele lenses, flashes, tripods, filters ... no need to spend money on that. I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II and then add 85/1.8USM later (which I recommend for portraits).
The problem is that you never know before you try it. My current choice is 6D+40/2.8STM (people, close-ups, stitching landscapes, travel) +150/2.8Macro for portraits and stuff outdoors.

+1. Find your style first before buying all that extra stuff. You may find that you use a filter about once a year. Don't buy anything until you find a definite need for it. Try without it. You might find a cheap workaround. For example grad ND - I find lightrooms grad filter way more flexible or take two exposures and blend in photoshop. For ND filter - f/22 does the job (well kind of!). Maybe a CPL is one you will need as thats not possible to replicate digitally. Tripod - my knee, lampost, railing etc. even used someones shoulder once.

When you catagorically cannot go further - then buy it.

I can agree to almost anything except FLASH. I consider flash as one of the most important accessory besides lens and camera. You can use it as a fill-in flash which makes portraits a lot better. It's also a great help for extending a little bit a picture's DR. I can live without a tripod (most of the time) and filters but I consider flash as a must whenever I take pictures except for some situations. You may argue that 6D can take a much higher ISO but when you know how to use your flash properly, your pictures will be a lot better.

Well, yes and no. It is a must-have in studio-like conditions or staged scenes (portraits or macro), but for candid or street photography flash can make it look unnatural and be embarrassing for people around you. However, I'm no flash expert, so I may be wrong.
I know that good photograph needs good lighting and outdoors there is plenty of it

 

[Vivid Color]

To beginner: Thank you for posting the link to your photos as it was very helpful to informing my suggestion to you, which is: Get the 6D with the 24-105L lens plus a really good clear filter. For the filter, I'll recommend the B+W XS-Pro Digital 010 UV-Haze MRC nano (77mm size). (I bought this filter for my 24-105 after others on this site recommended it.) Buy these 3 items plus an SD card and you'll be good to go. Check B&H and Adorama and you might find a deal in which a bag is thrown in. I realize this puts you at the maximum of what you want to spend, but I think it is the best investment strategy for the type of photos you take. The filter is not cheap so you may need to wait on getting the 50 mm, but that's ok. It may even be for the best. While using the 24-105 for a while, you can have time to save up some more money and then decide whether you want to get a 50 mm 1.8 or 1.4 or 40 mm 2.8 or a telephoto zoom. Other posters to your query have suggested a flash, and you will want/need one at some point. (Most of your photos seem to be taken outdoors so that is why I'm not prioritizing a flash.) Also on the wait until you can save up for them list are CPL and ND filters and a tripod. All of these things are excellent and important to have but I would not trade off buying the 6D to get them right now. (Even the camera bag is optional. I have several, but I have also opted on many occasions to wrap my camera and lens up with two large thick hand towels so I could carry them in a regular backpack or tote.) I bought the T1i/500D several years ago when full frame DSLRs were not as affordable as they are now. I bought the 6D several months ago and love it. It is, in my opinion, truly a camera body you can grow into. That said, your priorities may differ and if you do decide to go with the 600D, then consider the EF 17-40mm lens instead of the EF-S lenses. That way, if/when you move to FF, you'll at least have a lens that is FF compatible.

 

[RadioPath]

Hi,
how about 600D + 50 1.4 + 17-40 4.0 L? Should be 1400-1500$ and you have a standard zoom and nice fast portrait lens for now.
If/when you decide to go FF you would already have a wide-angle zoom and low-light standard prime; throw in a longer prime or zoom and you'd be set and could keep the older crop-body as a backup.
All the best
RadioPath

Edit: Looks like Vivid Color beat me to the punch

 

[Rocguy]

I started with a 650D and quickly wished I had gotten a FF. Which I did. 6D + 24-105. NO regrets about upgrading to the 6D. But I do wish I hadn't started with the crop camera. I'm currently getting ready to sell it. And according to eBay prices I won't lose too much money on it. But it's just an extra step that really was not necessary. If the 6D is within your budget just do it.

 

[Zv]

One thing I really like about the 6D is the sound the shutter makes - just so smooth and pressable. In comparison my 5D II just sounds like some old man sneezing and those rebels are just as bad. Clunk Clunk hurts my soul!

Sorry, maybe not your highest priority!

 

[ecka]

One thing I really like about the 6D is the sound the shutter makes - just so smooth and pressable. In comparison my 5D II just sounds like some old man sneezing and those rebels are just as bad. Clunk Clunk hurts my soul!

Sorry, maybe not your highest priority!

+1
The shutter sound was never something I cared about, until I tried 6D . Now I love it.

 

[pato]

Hi Beginner
I'm in the same situation.
Reasons for me to probably go to the 6D from the 550D are:
- bigger body = better for my hands
- more controll in manual mode (you have many additional options for ISO (more steps), more options for the AF points, ...)
- narrower DoF, could also be a problem sometimes
- bigger and brighter view finder!!!

Negative points are
- only EF lenses = more expensive
- less reach compared to APS-C with the same lens

But yeah, the positives clearly outweight the negatives

 

[beginner]

Again All.... Thank you for all your input, suggestions on accessories and alternative combinations. I've decided to get the 6D with the kit lens. I want to get the kit lens as I really want to play with different length options, ISO and SS to get real life experiences on different combinations. So no primes as of yet.

To Ecka & ZV: Agreed. My focus is to get the basics and grow with the camera. Add things if I need to. I don't find the need for a flash or a tripod initially. I'm sure I will add when I know what I'm doing a bit more. Only planning to get the UV filter at the moment ( I think?!?) to protect the lens. For tripods... I know they have their place. I have never used one before but I actually love using my body to get the shots. It somehow makes me feel the photo so much more. Quiet shutter is of course my preference and glad 6D accommodates that as well.

To VividColors: Thanks for your input and taking the time to look at my pictures. It makes me more confident on my choice for going for the 6D.

To Pato: If we can afford it, 6D seems to be it. I can see what you mean about the EF Lenses. It was a concern for me also. That is why I have decided to go with the kit with 24-105... Roughly, the lens is around 1100 and the body is 2000. You do the math. In the mean time, you are getting a great camera and a great lens. I doubt I will be looking for any other lens other than a couple of much cheaper primes. So, at this point I am not even worrying about the EF lens prices. If the day comes to buy a EF lens that is really expensive, I will assume somehow I am making real good money from this hobby. At that point, the cost will be funded by the hobby and I'll be writing it off as a business expense.

 

[pato]

What I completely forgot to mention (but was already mentioned by others) and this actually pisses me a bit off, it has no built in flash. Nikon is able to do that, so I'm a bit unhappy that Canon did not manage to do this. On the other hand the 6D has GPS and WIFI built in which also occupies some little space.
Recently I checked all my pictures, I haven't often used the flash, but you might be missing some night portraits out.

Once I have the 6D I'll probably miss the reach, even with the 24-105 lens. I made a graph of all my pictures and discovered that 1/3 of all my taken pictures are made with ~140 and ~160mm, so I will need a lens with further reach. I guess it would be the 100-400mm one, once I've saved up again enough money. Until then my old, crappy, 75-300 (or 70-300) has to cover it, together with my 400mm Sigma Prime.
ExposurePlot is the name of the program, really usefull for this kind of information.

Anyway, congratulation about your choice! Maybe you could write a small follow up in a week or two after you had some time to test the kit.

 

[Loswr]

What I completely forgot to mention (but was already mentioned by others) and this actually pisses me a bit off, it has no built in flash. ... but you might be missing some night portraits out.

Indeed...that special deer-in-headlights look you can achieve with an on-axis flash as the primary light source for the shot is something to which many aspire. :

 

[ecka]

Again All.... Thank you for all your input, suggestions on accessories and alternative combinations. I've decided to get the 6D with the kit lens. I want to get the kit lens as I really want to play with different length options, ISO and SS to get real life experiences on different combinations. So no primes as of yet.

To Ecka & ZV: Agreed. My focus is to get the basics and grow with the camera. Add things if I need to. I don't find the need for a flash or a tripod initially. I'm sure I will add when I know what I'm doing a bit more. Only planning to get the UV filter at the moment ( I think?!?) to protect the lens. For tripods... I know they have their place. I have never used one before but I actually love using my body to get the shots. It somehow makes me feel the photo so much more. Quiet shutter is of course my preference and glad 6D accommodates that as well.

I don't use UV filters, so I don't have one, because in my shooting environments the chance of damaging front glass element is very low. No UV filter adds anything good to the picture, quite opposite, you are trading some of the goodness for safety. So, if dust and moisture are not your only concern, then make sure that the glass you are putting to protect your lens is a tough one, "bulletproof" . Otherwise, (IMHO) it's not worth it. Most of the UV filters break much easier than the lens glass itself.

To VividColors: Thanks for your input and taking the time to look at my pictures. It makes me more confident on my choice for going for the 6D.

To Pato: If we can afford it, 6D seems to be it. I can see what you mean about the EF Lenses. It was a concern for me also. That is why I have decided to go with the kit with 24-105... Roughly, the lens is around 1100 and the body is 2000. You do the math. In the mean time, you are getting a great camera and a great lens. I doubt I will be looking for any other lens other than a couple of much cheaper primes. So, at this point I am not even worrying about the EF lens prices. If the day comes to buy a EF lens that is really expensive, I will assume somehow I am making real good money from this hobby. At that point, the cost will be funded by the hobby and I'll be writing it off as a business expense.

Well, if there was an equivalent EF-S lens for every EF lens and just as good, then they would be just as expensive (or even more). For example, 24-105L beats the EF-S 17-55/2.8 in every way - build, DoF, IQ, focal range, while both are similar in size, weight and price. Take a look at EF 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM, the EF-S equivalent would be 17-85/2.2-3.5 IS USM, I doubt that it would be any smaller, better or cheaper. Actually, I'd prefer 6D+28-135/3.5-5.6 over 60D+17-55/2.8. So, I call this myth busted

 

[Zv]

Lens hoods work just fine for protecting the front element in most cases except sand / dust and rain. If you absolutely have to shoot in those conditions then yeah buy a clear filter. It's not a bad thing to have, Canon recommend you use one to complete the weather sealing on most L lenses.

 

[verysimplejason]

What I completely forgot to mention (but was already mentioned by others) and this actually pisses me a bit off, it has no built in flash. ... but you might be missing some night portraits out.

Indeed...that special deer-in-headlights look you can achieve with an on-axis flash as the primary light source for the shot is something to which many aspire. :

Actually a built-in flash is also quite useful as a fill-in flash to achieve a little bit more DR and to take away some shadows from people's faces during portraits. Of course this should be done using slow-sync. At night, built-in flash use should be minimized and only during emergency cases. A good external flash is always preferred. At night for high contrast situations (background has lights on it), it will be very hard to meter without a flash to help you get the shot (metering using the background and letting the flash lit up your subject's faces). As such, using a built-in flash is better than without though again, an external flash is very much preferred.

 

[verysimplejason]

I regret that I didn't start with a FF camera. I didn't know what to get, so I tried to follow the most popular advice for beginners, which was/is like:
- body doesn't matter, half-dead Rebel is fine ; (not for me)
- get the best lenses you can afford ...; (best doesn't mean the most expensive)
- ... which are 11-16/2.8, 17-55/2.8, 70-200L, 100-400L; (not really, primes work better for me)
- don't forget about accessories: tripods, flashes, filters, etc; (you can buy these later, if you feel the need) (IMHO, only memory cards, bags and spare batteries are the must-have, everything else is optional).
Now I know that it does not fit my style. I don't need to cover the 16-600mm focal range. I rarely use tele lenses, flashes, tripods, filters ... no need to spend money on that. I should have bought a used 5D with 50/1.8'II and then add 85/1.8USM later (which I recommend for portraits).
The problem is that you never know before you try it. My current choice is 6D+40/2.8STM (people, close-ups, stitching landscapes, travel) +150/2.8Macro for portraits and stuff outdoors.

+1. Find your style first before buying all that extra stuff. You may find that you use a filter about once a year. Don't buy anything until you find a definite need for it. Try without it. You might find a cheap workaround. For example grad ND - I find lightrooms grad filter way more flexible or take two exposures and blend in photoshop. For ND filter - f/22 does the job (well kind of!). Maybe a CPL is one you will need as thats not possible to replicate digitally. Tripod - my knee, lampost, railing etc. even used someones shoulder once.

When you catagorically cannot go further - then buy it.

I can agree to almost anything except FLASH. I consider flash as one of the most important accessory besides lens and camera. You can use it as a fill-in flash which makes portraits a lot better. It's also a great help for extending a little bit a picture's DR. I can live without a tripod (most of the time) and filters but I consider flash as a must whenever I take pictures except for some situations. You may argue that 6D can take a much higher ISO but when you know how to use your flash properly, your pictures will be a lot better.

Well, yes and no. It is a must-have in studio-like conditions or staged scenes (portraits or macro), but for candid or street photography flash can make it look unnatural and be embarrassing for people around you. However, I'm no flash expert, so I may be wrong.
I know that good photograph needs good lighting and outdoors there is plenty of it

A good flash is required especially at night or for high-contrast scenes (background vs subject) which is quite prevalent in street photography. This is to keep the background from being overexposed and your subject (people mostly) from being underexposed unless you want to try applying HDR which isn't always applicable (actually most of the time). In the morning, you can opt for a reflector sometimes but at night, there's no light you can reflect so you're down to your flash to expose your subject properly.

And another thing, a speedlight used as a fill-in flash isn't too unnatural that a slight WB adjustment can't fix.

http://digital-photography-school.com/using-fill-flash

 

[Loswr]

To Pato: If we can afford it, 6D seems to be it. I can see what you mean about the EF Lenses. It was a concern for me also. That is why I have decided to go with the kit with 24-105... Roughly, the lens is around 1100 and the body is 2000. You do the math. In the mean time, you are getting a great camera and a great lens. I doubt I will be looking for any other lens other than a couple of much cheaper primes. So, at this point I am not even worrying about the EF lens prices. If the day comes to buy a EF lens that is really expensive, I will assume somehow I am making real good money from this hobby. At that point, the cost will be funded by the hobby and I'll be writing it off as a business expense.

Well, if there was an equivalent EF-S lens for every EF lens and just as good, then they would be just as expensive (or even more). For example, 24-105L beats the EF-S 17-55/2.8 in every way - build, DoF, IQ, focal range, while both are similar in size, weight and price. Take a look at EF 28-135/3.5-5.6 IS USM, the EF-S equivalent would be 17-85/2.2-3.5 IS USM, I doubt that it would be any smaller, better or cheaper. Actually, I'd prefer 6D+28-135/3.5-5.6 over 60D+17-55/2.8. So, I call this myth busted

It's busted as long as you're talking about comparing the EF-S lens on APS-C with the EF lens on FF. But for example, when both are used on the same APS-C body, the EF-S 17-55/2.8 delivers better IQ than the EF 24-105/4L, and (IMO) the former is a more useful focal range (24mm is 'normal' on APS-C meaning no wide angle therefore the 24-105 is not a 'general purpose zoom' covering wide to short tele).

Personally, I'd prefer the 60D+17-55 over the 6D+28-135 any day. But I'd take 6D+24-105 over both.

 

[tron]

It would be 6D and 24-105 for me. No dilemma!

If you go FF you will have no need to upgrade to FF later. You can built upon this system.