6D vs 7D mark II

Sort by date Sort by votes
D

David - Sydney

Canon Rumors Premium
Dec 7, 2014
3,483
3,128
74,814
www.flickr.com
#1
Hi Guys... in a quandary. I have a 7D with 10-22mm lens, etc. Getting on now after 3 years of reasonably heavy use and generally happy but hitting the limit with noise/wide aperture lens. I do nightscapes, sea/landscapes but also some action shots (not published). Going full frame was the next step especially for low noise with wide angle/wide aperture so the 6D was the obvious next step for me but 7D mark II sensor seems to be as good with noise and has all the new goodies as well. 1 body would be nice rather than 6D + current 7D.

6D pros => more expensive as need new wide angle 16-35mm f/4 (options for 14mm samyang f/2.8, 8-15mm etc), wifi, better DoF
7D mark II pros => keep same lens set (10-22mm is the best one), very good AF (+f8 centre)/burst, much better video, wifi only with eyefi, SD+CF, very good weather sealing, flash

Thoughts?

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS => horses for courses. totally different end user market.
6D best for landscape/portrait with low light/high ISO/depth of field but low ISO dynamic range is not fantastic. Lens range is best for FF
7Dii best for AF/action/video. 7Dii should be better than 7D for everything.
Worth the wait for 6Dii?

Thanks
David.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmarriottsydney/
7D, 10-22mm, 24-105L, 70-200L II, 50mm f/1.4, 1.4xIII, 600EX-RT
 
#2
David - Sydney said:
Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Question is how happy you are with your current low iso iq for landscape. The ff sensor is definitely "better" as in "more post-processing leverage, better gradients", but if you're not selling you shots it isn't a critical difference. The 7d2 will be much more fun than the 6d, esp. if your preference is to have only one camera body anyway.

For portraits and thin dof shooting the ff + your 70-200L2 will be much better, but you don't seem to do this. Don't let yourself be talked into thinking that ff is the only way to get satisfactory iq, it really depends on what you're doing.
 
Upvote 0
#3
For shooting nightscapes and landscapes like you're talking about I'd go with the 6d. Ecspecially if you want to go wide as you can and are thinking about getting the 16-35 f4. It's such a great lens and so sharp. The 6d focus points and frame rate are its week points imo. But for mainly shooting what you are that won't matter. With night photography you'll be amazed at the ISO performance compared to the original 7d.
 
Upvote 0
#4
Don't let yourself be talked into thinking that ff is the only way to get satisfactory iq, it really depends on what you're doing.
Click to expand...

+1

I did read that the 7D2's low banding is excellent for long-exposure nightscape shooting so that might be a selling point. If you aren't looking to bring up detail in dark areas after long exposures, the 7D2 has that going for you.
 
Upvote 0
#5
You could make a argument that crop sensors are better for landscapes since they give you more depth of field. Lots of "Pro" landscape shooters take 2 shots focusing at different spots of the scene then combine them in PS so everything is sharp..... To the op I think you'll be happy with either camera. FF is not the only option but I do think for night photography the 6d or FF as the way to go. Less noise with the high ISO you'll need.
 
Upvote 0
#8
I have both a 6D and a 7D. I love my 7D for everything except the high ISO noise - which is pretty bad. When I first got the 6D it was really a step down in handling and especially the focus compared to the 7D. It took me a while to get to like the 6D itself - I was spoiled by the 7D. However, the IQ on the 6D was wonderful.

I use the 6D for pretty much everything except when I need action shots. I had the 7D on the shelf for quite a while and recently pulled it out for football season. Now I am GASing for a 7DII - but I wouldn't get rid of the 6D - for indoor & low light the 7D can't touch it.
 
Upvote 0
#9
I just took out my 7DII and compared it to my 6D for landscapes this weekend, just to see how it would compare. It is good and gets the job done, but still not as good with noise, and believe me not even close! I too shot with a 7D for a while and made good use of it, before buying the 6D. I actually gave my 7D away to a relative, and missed it a few times. So when the 7D II came out, I bought one immediately. It serves mainly as a back up camera when I travel for my landscape vacations, and secondly for action and video from time to time.

I looked at your work and it's really nice. Your 10-22 lens matched up with the 7D served you very well. I have two recent action shots (before purchasing 7D II) that I took with my 6D on flickr, with my dog, and one of a whale. Take a look, you can use it for action, it's just painfully slow, but it does work. https://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/14908192883/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/1and0hound/15191260015/

Happy shooting :)
 
Upvote 0
#10
I think that if your main lens is the 10-22, then you will love the 6D for its IQ, but as you say, it does mean also investing in the 16-35L. If it's as good as the As others have said, the limitation of the 6D is that it misses the sophisticated auto-focus of the 7D/7D2/5D3. However, I managed fine at Top Gear Live in Sydney earlier this year.

If your action photography tends to be in good light, then keeping the 7D alongside the 6D would give you the choice, and give you an extended reach option for any telephoto lenses that you have. I'm contemplating a crop sensor camera to use with my current lenses.

There are plenty of places in Sydney that will hire equipment if you want an extended test. I hired my 70-300L from Georges on condition that the hire money would be refunded if I bought the lens. I did.

Incidentally, did I meet you around Sydney Harbour last Feb/March, when I was carrying my OM-10, or was that another photographer called David in Sydney?
 
Upvote 0
#11
Hjalmarg1 said:
Just get the 7D2. It will give you really IQ, much better than your current 7D and you'll get better AF, particularly when shooting action.
I bought the 5D3 because it was more all-around camera than the 6D with much better AF.
Click to expand...

Not really. None of the side-by-side comparisons I've seen between 7D and 7Dii are showing much improvement at all, and nothing has shouted out "much better", or even "after 5 years...". On the other hand, the difference between 7D + 10-22mm and 6D + 16-35mm is significant (I own both bodies and lenses). I loved the combo with 7D, had lots of fun with it, but there is a big step up with the 6D.

I was in the same conundrum, but as feedback started trickling in with the 7Dii capabilities I decided to keep the 7D and augment my shutter habit with 6D. I locked myself in even, received a good deal on the 16-35mm via CPW and purchased it first. There was no turning back. I'll keep the 7D for long reach and use the 6D for everything else.
 
Upvote 0
#14
papa-razzi said:
I have both a 6D and a 7D. I love my 7D for everything except the high ISO noise - which is pretty bad. When I first got the 6D it was really a step down in handling and especially the focus compared to the 7D. It took me a while to get to like the 6D itself - I was spoiled by the 7D. However, the IQ on the 6D was wonderful.

I use the 6D for pretty much everything except when I need action shots. I had the 7D on the shelf for quite a while and recently pulled it out for football season. Now I am GASing for a 7DII - but I wouldn't get rid of the 6D - for indoor & low light the 7D can't touch it.
Click to expand...

I have the same and have considered the same. In the end, I'm still happy with the 7D and 6D as a combo. I see them as unique to each other, yet complimentary. I like the notion of having two bodies also.
 
Upvote 0
#16
Nethawk said:
Not really. None of the side-by-side comparisons I've seen between 7D and 7Dii are showing much improvement at all, and nothing has shouted out "much better", or even "after 5 years...".
Click to expand...

At low ISO the 7D2 is less 'gritty'. At high ISO I would say it's "much better", though obviously not as good as the 6D.

On the other hand, the difference between 7D + 10-22mm and 6D + 16-35mm is significant (I own both bodies and lenses). I loved the combo with 7D, had lots of fun with it, but there is a big step up with the 6D.
Click to expand...

That's because of the lens in question. A Tokina 11-16 or Sigma 8-16 would even that up.
 
Upvote 0
#19
For pure landscapes, the 6D is better because of its FF sensor, although I-forgot-who declared the 7DII the best low-light shooter because of its low thermal noise or something...
The AF of the 6D isn't too bad, but the 7DII is miles ahead in that section. 7DII is the more appealing package for me, as noise is (after TDP's results) only a good stop better at high ISO's.
 
Upvote 0
#20
tayassu said:
For pure landscapes, the 6D is better because of its FF sensor, although I-forgot-who declared the 7DII the best low-light shooter because of its low thermal noise or something...
The AF of the 6D isn't too bad, but the 7DII is miles ahead in that section. 7DII is the more appealing package for me, as noise is (after TDP's results) only a good stop better at high ISO's.
Click to expand...

The 6D will beat out the 7D in all circumstances related to low light, both for focusing and high ISO noise. The 7Dii improves upon both when comparing with the original 7D but it still can't touch the 6D.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
Canon officially announces the Canon EOS R6 Mark II, Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L IS USM and Canon Speedlite EL-5
Replies
450
Views
99K
SwissFrank
S
S
135mm SHOOTOUT! Detailed Analysis of the Hand-Holdability and General Sharpness of the RF135/1.8, the RF100-500/4.5-7.1, and the EF135/2
Replies
24
Views
10K
Loswr
L
Iain L
7D II alternative?
Replies
12
Views
7K
Iain L
Iain L
L
Will there be an APS-C EOS R-series camera?
Replies
102
Views
29K
Loswr
L
L
RF and EF extenders on the EF 600/4L IS II
Replies
63
Views
31K
justashooter
J
Top Bottom
Home
Forums
Media
Menu