Perhaps you could ask 70d or a Teaspoon as this wouldmhave more relevance than your original question!!
Upvote
0
70D or 6D
- Thread starter GaabNZ
- Start date
- Status
im in the same dilema. I have a 350D at the moment and i am just getting back into photography. Was looking at getting a 5D2 second hand, but then I was thinking i should just purchase brand new. Still going to wait till the 70D is released as i would like to hold it in my hands before making and prior purchases
Upvote
0
sarakoth said:*subscribed*
I have the same decision to make (though coming from an even older 500D)...
I like portraits, and a bit of landscape, but with young kids, sports carnivals, running around at parties, love animals at the zoo,etc.. it just seems other than the top of the line cameras, I have to make a choice and compromise what I want to shoot.
I invested in the 15-85 EF-S which is a great lens, but to go to a 6D I would have to get a 24-105 which is an additional cost as well and from some comparisons I have seen the IQ between then (on the same camera) is quite similar..
I was hanging out for a 7D2, but the more I read it is a real unknown when it will be available and it will also be a top of the line crop with alot of extras I don't need, for a lot more cost. hence thinking I should choose between the 70D and 6D.
If you like your 15-85mm EF-S IS lens (I had one and enjoyed it), then I would go with the 70D. If the improvements to hight ISO materialize, I too might be interested. Like you say, the 7D II will be much more especially if they make it with a built in grip (a la 1Dx). The only thing that worries me about the 70D is the AF performance; I hope it is better than what was on the 7D. There was no mention if there are any double cross type points in the 19 point array. That make a big difference when tracking birds in flight.
Upvote
0
oscaroo said:
Really? Maybe yours is defective. I frequently use fast primes wide open on my 6D in low light (by which I mean dimly lit rooms, outdoors at night with sparse street lighting or less - that sort of thing) and almost never have a problem getting it to focus (and when I do have a problem, it's rather extreme situations like, say, a black statue). Based on reports here and reviews, my experience is hardly atypical.
Upvote
0
sdsr said:
+2 I have a 6D and don't have any problems getting pictures in focus. The center AF point is great and the off-center points usable. I use my 35 1.4L, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 135 2.0L extensively with the 6D with zero problems - in fact it works fantastic.
Oscaroo, you should have Canon service take a look at your camera.
Upvote
0
Based on what we know today, I'd recommend the 6D based on what the OP whats to use it for, but I think waiting a few months until hands-on reviews of the 70D are available would be a good idea. We will all have a better idea about the 70D's high ISO capabilities and general IQ.
I know the 6D is an excellent camera for landscapes and kids, I have one and that's what I use it for 95% of the time. The 70D looks like an excellent camera from the early reviews. However, its strengths appear to be video and sports. The 6D's strength is IQ, so great for landscape, portraits and low light photography.
I find the 6D to be an excellent landscape camera. I often take it on long hikes and overnight hiking/camping trips and it performs great. What don't you like about it for trekking?
(1) For landscapes, you are generally going for as much depth of field as you can without running into diffraction, so typically f/8-f/16. Generally, I'm using a wide focal length 24-35mm, I try to keep the foreground interest elements at or near the hyperfocal distance for my lens - which yields a very high DOF. I focus on the foreground element either using the center AF point and re-composing, or one of the non-center points that work very well in decent light. At these narrow apertures, even if you miss the focus a little it will not matter, as nearly everything will be in focus due to the DOF.
(2) I have a 7D and 6D and agree the noise of the 7D is pretty much non-existant at ISO 320 and below. However, the OP stated he wanted to use the camera for taking pictures of kids. I also have two kids at home, and find the low-light/high ISO capabilities of the 6D to be terrific. I take lots of indoor shots of the kids at ISO3200 that look great. I don't even consider shots like that with my 7D - the noise would be impossible to clean up in PP.
(3) Depends on the photographer. I'm pretty anal, so like my landscape shots to be noise-free.
(4) The 17-55 2.8 is a great lens!
(5) Agreed, APS-C lenses are much smaller and lighter. Full format will give you better image quality at the expense of size and weight of the gear. That said APS-C IQ is pretty damned good, more than good enough for most people, so its really a matter of personal preference.
I know the 6D is an excellent camera for landscapes and kids, I have one and that's what I use it for 95% of the time. The 70D looks like an excellent camera from the early reviews. However, its strengths appear to be video and sports. The 6D's strength is IQ, so great for landscape, portraits and low light photography.
intxaurrek said:
I find the 6D to be an excellent landscape camera. I often take it on long hikes and overnight hiking/camping trips and it performs great. What don't you like about it for trekking?
(1) For landscapes, you are generally going for as much depth of field as you can without running into diffraction, so typically f/8-f/16. Generally, I'm using a wide focal length 24-35mm, I try to keep the foreground interest elements at or near the hyperfocal distance for my lens - which yields a very high DOF. I focus on the foreground element either using the center AF point and re-composing, or one of the non-center points that work very well in decent light. At these narrow apertures, even if you miss the focus a little it will not matter, as nearly everything will be in focus due to the DOF.
(2) I have a 7D and 6D and agree the noise of the 7D is pretty much non-existant at ISO 320 and below. However, the OP stated he wanted to use the camera for taking pictures of kids. I also have two kids at home, and find the low-light/high ISO capabilities of the 6D to be terrific. I take lots of indoor shots of the kids at ISO3200 that look great. I don't even consider shots like that with my 7D - the noise would be impossible to clean up in PP.
(3) Depends on the photographer. I'm pretty anal, so like my landscape shots to be noise-free.
(4) The 17-55 2.8 is a great lens!
(5) Agreed, APS-C lenses are much smaller and lighter. Full format will give you better image quality at the expense of size and weight of the gear. That said APS-C IQ is pretty damned good, more than good enough for most people, so its really a matter of personal preference.
Upvote
0
A lot of issues that people have when focussing with the 6D tend to be more about the user and not the camera!
Upvote
0
GaabNZ said:
In my opinion, nobody should have an opinion on the 70D just yet. Wait for hands on and some real testing.
The price has already dropped as low as it will go on the 6D, with B&H's current "deal" and $400 rebate. Not sure if you can take advantage of this if you are outside the USA, though. The only time the 6D's price will be lower, is when its own replacement gets close.
My vote is for the 6D, especially since you're only interested in stills photography, and you shoot landscape. Much debate exists over the 6D's autofocus ability, so I will now delve into that abyss for four paragraphs. My copy works just fine, even in servo mode in low light, whether with all points or center point. Certainly the outer points are the weak link, but at the 6D's price point (compared to Nikon's D600), I feel there is no significant difference in overall autofocus performance. The 7D's sensor (which the 70D is supposedly getting), however, might fare better...I have not done a side by side to test autofocus with one yet. I've only used the 7D on it's own.
Further on the above point...just two nights ago, I performed some servo tracking testing with my 135 f/2L lens on my 6D. With a bit of tweaking of the servo autofocus menu, at 4.5 frames per second, I was able to get 6 to 7 out of 10 shots at or near perfect focus...all points active. However, to achieve this I needed to keep the subject at or around the center point. But...With only a single outer AF point active, the number of sharp shots dropped to 3 out of 10. This is certainly what most of those who complain about the 6D's autofocus, are complaining about. Additionally, apparently there have been some samples of the 6D which included a faulty AF sensor. Not sure if Canon has officially commented on that. I would say, perhaps beware of samples with early production serial numbers. HOWEVER...there are also those people who just want to brow beat 6D users, in a lame attempt to convince them they wasted their money, and should have bought the 5D3 instead. Ignore these people; their minds are closed. They seem to lack photographic and technical ability.
The subject was a camera lens box on a moderately lit (a lot less than daytime sun intensity) table, indoors. Color temperature needed about 2600K, so that should indicate the low quality of the light. The movement was me, holding the camera and walking very swiftly toward the target. Shutter priority mode was 1/800, aperture varied between f/2 and f/2.2. Auto ISO varied between 12.8k and 20k. The results are more than adequate servo autofocus performance, compared to the 5D3, 1D4, and 1DX I have used. Apologies to those 6D haters out there, but it really does work adequately. On still targets in a comparably very very dark room, I was able to coax some auto focus out of the outer points, but it took time. The center point obviously worked fairly well. In a similar very low light situation (with the same 135L mounted), I could not get the 1D4 to AF at all, it hunted and gave up.
In bright daylight, servo autofocus via my 6D, can get between 7 and 10 out of 10 shots in perfect focus...depending on how difficult and busy the background lighting is...especially if that background has bright contrasty elements, and the target subject is dimly lit with very little contrast. So this is basically very close to the best autofocus available in bright light...in my opinion...achieved with a much reviled AF sensor to boot. I will admit that there are probably situations with extremely fast moving targets, where my results would fall well below 7 out of 10 sharp shots in very bright light. But I have not encountered those yet. I'd like to. Some of these targets include machines that rev to 18,000 rpm and will visit the "Circuit of the Americas" in Texas later this year.
However, considering a purchase of the 6D, is dependent on how many full frame lenses you currently own, or are willing to buy. Price is a huge factor with them.
The advantages of the 6D as a full frame camera for landscape, should still prevail even over the new 70D with it's digic 6...especially since wide angle landscape will likely always be hindered by dedicated crop format wide angle lenses, with their inferior resolution and higher effective chromatic aberration (due to their lower quality of design, lower tolerances, and the CA is magnified by the smaller pixels of the crop format). I have owned and rented quite a few, none of them were stellar...some better than others.
However, if you use the best quality full frame wide angle lenses and are happy with the narrower FOV of a 1.6x crop, such as with a Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 (it might be the "best" overall wide angle lens currently available)...then I suppose a 70D could suffice, if you like its other qualities better than the 6D.
But...for low ISO, and/or longer exposure/tripod landscape imaging only...overall the Nikon D800E is certainly still the best body available. When the future high MP Canon body comes out, that will likely change...but it should be priced well above the D800. So price could be a factor there, especially for a non-pro, or a part time pro who does not yet make big money, like myself. Not that I am considering Nikon...but it's low ISO performance advantage is real, and widely accepted on here. Nikon as a system, however, is not superior, and much of the time, inferior.
Oh, and as for high ISO performance (above 1600, but specifically between 2000 and 10,000...where low available light photography lives), I say the 6D generates the cleanest files available in 35mm format. Depending on the specific ISO setting, I have found the 1DX's RAW files to have less chrominance noise than the 6D, but higher luminance noise (grain). Ditto for the 5D3, only it's slightly worse than the 1DX. Their grain is large in its structure, and thus it cannot be "reduced" without throwing away a lot of resolution. The 6D's grain at the pixel level, is much finer. Thus a bit more of it can be reduced in post editing, without throwing resolution out with it. The Nikon D600's noise performance, from the comparison samples I have seen, looks far worse with both types of noise, than any of these three Canons.
No doubt the 70D will have fine noise performance for a crop camera, but whether or not it beats the Sony/Nikon 1.5x crop sensors, I don't know. It might only equal them, if that. That would still put it miles ahead of the 7D, and the T4i or T5i.
Upvote
0
What do you think of your ISO performance today? Is it OK or completely inadequate?
Given the same choice and considering the little info there are on the web I'd still go for the 70D as long as ISO performance were as good as or better than the 600D.
Here is a suggestion:
70D + 10-22 + 430ex
That would mean a new wide angle lens and possibly a flash. But both the flash and lens are great and I can warmly recommend them. The 10-22 have shorter MFD than the 17-40 (same price but FF) and therefore creates stronger pictures.
When it comes to zoom, you cant get better than the Canon 70-200f4L IMO. The 2.8 is great but IQ@f4 is not so much better that it warrants the extra weight and cost.
Given the same choice and considering the little info there are on the web I'd still go for the 70D as long as ISO performance were as good as or better than the 600D.
Here is a suggestion:
70D + 10-22 + 430ex
That would mean a new wide angle lens and possibly a flash. But both the flash and lens are great and I can warmly recommend them. The 10-22 have shorter MFD than the 17-40 (same price but FF) and therefore creates stronger pictures.
When it comes to zoom, you cant get better than the Canon 70-200f4L IMO. The 2.8 is great but IQ@f4 is not so much better that it warrants the extra weight and cost.
Upvote
0
GaabNZ said:
Canon made the choice between the 70D and 6D quite difficult, IMO.
Without a doubt, the 70D is the more well-rounded and versatile camera.
The 6D is a one trick pony: it has a FF sensor and ... that's it.
Of course the 6D will be the better camera in terms of image quality.
Canon stated themselves that at the RAW level, the 70D ISO performance will be 'on par' with that of the 60D.
The 6D has about a ~2 ISO stops advantage over the 60D, which it will obviously keep over the 70D as well.
So, if you decide to go with the 6D, you are obviously going to get better image quality.
But this will cost you more - and at the same time you'll be losing some fun and useful features.
Like I said, Canon made this a difficult choice.
Good luck with your decision.
Upvote
0
I say go for the lens....Dylan777 said:duydaniel said:
-1...disagree. Let say you going to shoot a indoor volleyball, football or soccer game.
Here are your options:
1. Canon 300mm f2.8 IS II + 1D X
2. Canon 300mm f2.8 IS II + 7D
You think the photos(IQ) from 7D will be same or near to 1D X?
As others already mentioned, FF is the way to go
He is talking about landscape so lets look at a 24mm lens. To get the same field of View, the crop equivalent is 15mm. The question becomes is a 6D with a 24mm lens better than a 7D with a 15mm lens. It is very hard to make a 15mm lens with the same image quality and distortion of a 24mm lens. 24 wins, and therefore 6D is better for landscape than 7D.
Btw.... I am not a FF fanatic... My next camera will be the 7D2. For my needs, crop cameras are better, but I am not a landscape shooter.
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
Prior to my 5D III - I owned 40D, 60D, 7D, and 5D II. I do miss extra reach some time, but I doubt I would go back to crop. I'm talking about crop as primary camera. I do alot indoor shooting, therefore, FF is very important to me. That's just me of course
Upvote
0
bholliman said:
Thanks for your comments. Now I have more doubts about buying the 6D ;-)
The things I didn't like from it fr trekking were those I mentioned in the list (extra lens weight, AF, lack of flash...), but given your comments on the AF, I may reconsider.
Actually my current camera (30D that is still doing nicely!) has a similar configuration for AF points, but often it misses focus (at f/2.8 ), if I try to use sensors other than the center one. That is why I am a bit reluctant about that AF configuration.
The reason think the 70D's AF is interesting for me, is mainly because I usually take self-portraits over landscapes, and usually I am off-center. I cannot focus and recompose, since it's hard to focus on my face while I am not in the frame. So being able to focus off center in live view would be great for me. Just set f/10-14, focus on me in live view through a mobile phone, and shoot. Not sure how the 6D would behave with that.
And yes, you're very right about the low light capabilities of the 6D. I'd love it for indoor portraits, although it is not the main use I do with the camera.
If only Canon told us when 7DMkII would come out, I'd possibly forget about both and go for it ... ;-)
My main issue is the AF, I generally cannot easily focus and recompose, since I ofen take self-portraitsl.
Upvote
0
Hmm.
Given people's suggestions that my centre AF is a bit banged ... I might consider it getting checked out.
The situation I had where it didn't work was taking photos of some dancers, in low light. The dancers had moments where they would stand still for a second or so, and I would shoot then. I'd aim my 100 f2 at them and the photo would be OOF enough to annoy me.
Then I used my 24-105 and the photos of them were sharper, although at times, blurry cos of the slower shutter speed.
*shrug.
So the centre point is focussing ok, maybe it's an AFMA thing, i'll give it some more tests, etc, in due course. I've warranty till Dec anyway.
Given people's suggestions that my centre AF is a bit banged ... I might consider it getting checked out.
The situation I had where it didn't work was taking photos of some dancers, in low light. The dancers had moments where they would stand still for a second or so, and I would shoot then. I'd aim my 100 f2 at them and the photo would be OOF enough to annoy me.
Then I used my 24-105 and the photos of them were sharper, although at times, blurry cos of the slower shutter speed.
*shrug.
So the centre point is focussing ok, maybe it's an AFMA thing, i'll give it some more tests, etc, in due course. I've warranty till Dec anyway.
Upvote
0
I upgraded from a 7D and its superior focussing because I wanted FF, to date i have had no issues focussing in a variety of situations!! The picture quality from the 6D is by far and away more superior.
I am interested as to why the original poster would compare FF to a cropped sensor camera. Perhaps it should have been 70D or 7D!!
I am interested as to why the original poster would compare FF to a cropped sensor camera. Perhaps it should have been 70D or 7D!!
Upvote
0
Hi,intxaurrek said:
Hmm... all Canon DSLR that have live view can focus off center, so shouldn't be a main issue...
Anyway, if taking self-portraits is high priority, then you need to get a DSLR with flip screen (60D, 70D, 700D & etc)... I don't think 7DII will have flip screen.
Have a nice day.
Upvote
0
Just a thought on pop up flashes, nice for snapshots in low light, but not so effective for fill light.
Upvote
0
duydaniel said:
+1 can't agree more! Went to cars and coffee today with my 5d2 20-35 2.8L attached and a 12 year old canon 1d 4.2mp with 50 1.2L attached only difference I saw was bokeh and distortion from wide angle. Seriously this canon 1d 4.2mp at 12 years old makes just as good a photo as my 5d2. Shoot the af and 8fps on my 12 year old canon will be more than enough for the kids. This old 1d focuses so much better in bright and low light than my 5d2 its insane, disappointing actually. I have some old lenses and cameras but they give me great images compared to what people spend on higher end stuff. If you're not making money from your camera then buy what you want cause you will be happier that way. FF is awesome and crop is too try before you buy then you'll know!!
Upvote
0
- Status
