70D + 6D vs. 5D mark III

[Cariboucoach]

With the price of the 6D falling, and the reported price for the soon to be released 70D, would it make more sense to buy both of those cameras versus buying just the 5D III?

With the two cameras, you would have a built in back up if one breaks down, you have the "Reach" of a crop sensor, hopefully great video, low noise at high ISO, fast FPS, etc... Where is the down side to buying two instead of one camera?

Leo

 

[RLPhoto]

Where is the down side to buying two instead of one camera?

That its not those two cameras in one.

 

[Loswr]

With the price of the 6D falling, and the reported price for the soon to be released 70D, would it make more sense to buy both of those cameras versus buying just the 5D III?

With the two cameras, you would have a built in back up if one breaks down, you have the "Reach" of a crop sensor, hopefully great video, low noise at high ISO, fast FPS, etc... Where is the down side to buying two instead of one camera?

I had a 7D (crop sensor, good AF) and a 5DII (FF sensor, not-so-good AF). I far prefer having the 1D X, which is the best of both worlds (although I now have an EOS M as a backup).

FWIW, the 'reach' advantage of a crop sensor is only needed if you're printing bigger than about 16x24". Else, the IQ of the cropped FF image is equivalent to (at low ISO) or substantially better than (at high ISO) the APS-C sensor.

 

[sdsr]

With the price of the 6D falling, and the reported price for the soon to be released 70D, would it make more sense to buy both of those cameras versus buying just the 5D III?

With the two cameras, you would have a built in back up if one breaks down, you have the "Reach" of a crop sensor, hopefully great video, low noise at high ISO, fast FPS, etc... Where is the down side to buying two instead of one camera?

Leo

None, unless you want all those advantages in one camera, don't need/want a back-up, and don't mind that the images will look a bit different (that would be solved by buying two 6Ds...). There are other obvious advantages to having more than one with you when you're taking photos - less need to swap lenses, for one. (You could even mix brands to fill certain lens gaps - someone who wanted a very wide zoom might consider a Micro 4/3 + Panasonic 7-14 or Nikon FF + 14-24 (or whatever their fabled wide zoom is) to supplement a Canon fitted with, say, a 70-300L (Nikon has no equivalent that's anywhere near as good).) It's also nice if, when your spouse/partner accompanies you when taking photos, s/he has a comparably good camera to work with. That's why, over the past 16 months or so, I've gone from 5DII + T3i to 5DII + 6D to 5DIII + 6D, with an Olympus OM-D tossed into the mix. (I might even consider adding a D70, provided its image quality turns out to be better than the 60D's.)

 

[xylus]

I'm actually planning this way. I mainly take family portraits , group shots, few landscapes and macro. 6D and 70D/7DII is my target combination.

 

[fallenflowers]

i would pick 70d and 6d over 5d3 because you can have your 6d converted to infrared and keep your 70d for normal use.

 

[Chris.B]

I am also looking at doing just that.
Have bought the 6D and for the difference in price to the 5D3 can get the 70D.
1 great for low light and full frame the other with great frame rate and focus.

 

[verysimplejason]

For events, you'd require at least two cameras. One with wide lens and one with long lens. Most of the time, changing lens isn't an option. If you can't afford 5D3 + 5D2 (or some other cheaper 2nd cam), go for that 70D + 6D combo. Having the best gear isn't as important as getting the shots. Of course for other purposes, your 5D3 alone might be enough.