Not Another 6D vs 7DMKII Thread? well..... :D

[Steve]

I don't have either, either, and won't be getting either. But I am surprised that those two things are the only things that anyone can think of.

Whilst I won't belittle those two features for those that do need them, I can't help but feel most of us don't!

Well, the better AF system with ITR, -3EV center point and 65 cross type points over like 50% of the sensor might be considered an advantage by some! I agree, though - unless you primarily shoot action (and can't afford a 1DX) the 5D3 or 6D is probably better for most people.

 

[LesC]

6D first - the 7DMKII price is bound to drop after it's been out a while & you'll also have the benefit of user reviews just in case there are any problems with it...

 

[Quasimodo]

Is a hammer better than a saw? Should I get a hammer or a saw, or both? That is the question of the OP as I read it. Not the relative merits of a hammer and a saw. As the first reply in this thread indicated, only you can figure out whether you need to put in nails or make a piece into two in a good looking way..

As to you predicament. I had a similar predicament a couple of years ago. I was short on cash (for this sort of things) and I badly wanted the 135L, but also the 100L. While the one was the king of portrait, the other one could do portrait and macro... Well, I ended the dissonace by buying both

 

[dtaylor]

To the 5D-III punters... I can understand how the 5D-III can replace the 6D, but how exactly does the 5D-III replace a 7D-II?

Apart from fps what doesn't the 5D MkIII do that the 7D MkII can?

iTR tracking, AF points over a wider area of the VF, and light flicker compensation. That and fps would certainly make the 7D2 the better choice for some sports situations, but the 5D3 is no slouch in those situations.

The 7D2 will also remote control Canon flashes. Not a big deal, there are plenty of equipment options to add this to the 5D3.

 

[meywd]

As somebody who owns a 7D (since it came out in 2009) and a 6D (for 6 months), I can say that I like having the two bodies. The 6D has taken over all of my photography except for sports, bif, and aviation/airshow in-flight shots. I am planning on upgrading the 7D to the Mark II as sports are a big part of what I do.

In your situation, I would probably get the 6D first, unless your interests lean much more strongly to sports, bif, or focal-length constrained distance shooting.

Note that occasionally the 6D comes up on a refurb deal from Canon for under $1300. That is how I got mine, and it was perfect; completely indistinguishable from new, and Canon backs them with the same full warranty a new camera comes with.

I was worried about FF lenses, and still haven't completely solved that issue. I have the excellent Rokinon 14 2.8 which I bought on a deal, and I have the wonderful pre-art Sigma 50 1.4 EX (this lens is underrated -- it has great sharpness and the quality of Bokeh it yields is absolutely beautiful) which I used as a portrait lens on my 7D before the 6D arrived and stole the portrait shooting away and took over the 50 as a great walk-around lens. I also everything I need in the 70+ end, but nothing in-between the 14 and the 50. I've been filling in by renting occasional lenses at ProPhotoSupply in Portland, OR, where I can rent even the 24-70 2.8 II for $30 from Thursday evening through Monday morning (I'm lucky to live quite close to them). I've been eyeing the Cameda Camera deal on the 7D Mark II, which comes with the 24-70 f4 IS, but lacking a Canadian address, I'm not sure if I should try to go through with it.

6D first - the 7DMKII price is bound to drop after it's been out a while & you'll also have the benefit of user reviews just in case there are any problems with it...

It would be great to get the 6D at that price, and yeah the 7DMKII price will probably drop after a while.

Is a hammer better than a saw? Should I get a hammer or a saw, or both? That is the question of the OP as I read it. Not the relative merits of a hammer and a saw. As the first reply in this thread indicated, only you can figure out whether you need to put in nails or make a piece into two in a good looking way..

As to you predicament. I had a similar predicament a couple of years ago. I was short on cash (for this sort of things) and I badly wanted the 135L, but also the 100L. While the one was the king of portrait, the other one could do portrait and macro... Well, I ended the dissonace by buying both

nice solution, I did the same when i got the 70-200L f4 and the 100 f2.8

 

[tcmatthews]

I vote for the 6D as well. The 7D II will still be ISO limited compared to a full frame camera. For the 7D II you need to factor in the cost of CF cards to get the full benefit of the Camera.

I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards.

For general everyday use I would take a 6D any day over a 7D II. But I could use a high speed demon off a camera for birds. But given the coast I plan on renting one first. Then I will make my decision.

 

[Old Sarge]

I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards.

Page 42 and pagev504of the 7D II manual mention using UHS 1 cards.

 

[MichaelHodges]

In the field now with multiple cameras, crop and FF. I would not recommend a crop camera over FF camera for any use except tiny birds or to save money.

The 6D images are just aesthetically superior. Better color, noise, exposure, sharpness, contrast all combining for pleasing, smooth images.

The 6D center point is as good as any I've used from Canon.

 

[meywd]

I vote for the 6D as well. The 7D II will still be ISO limited compared to a full frame camera. For the 7D II you need to factor in the cost of CF cards to get the full benefit of the Camera.

I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards.

For general everyday use I would take a 6D any day over a 7D II. But I could use a high speed demon off a camera for birds. But given the coast I plan on renting one first. Then I will make my decision.

In the field now with multiple cameras, crop and FF. I would not recommend a crop camera over FF camera for any use except tiny birds or to save money.

The 6D images are just aesthetically superior. Better color, noise, exposure, sharpness, contrast all combining for pleasing, smooth images.

The 6D center point is as good as any I've used from Canon.

Thanks for your input, waiting for proper reviews of the 7DMKII is better i guess, before i got my 600D i was reading a lot on the 5D and 1D series for years, so i am really excited about having a FF camera.

 

[meywd]

I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards.

Page 42 and pagev504of the 7D II manual mention using UHS 1 cards.

from here it seem it does:

the burning question in my mind was "Does the 7D Mark II support the most current SD spec (which is now UHS-II)?" And I was bummed to see that the SD slot is only UHS-I, once again showing that Canon is behind in their adoption of the newer standards.

 

[meywd]

I don't have either, either, and won't be getting either. But I am surprised that those two things are the only things that anyone can think of.

Whilst I won't belittle those two features for those that do need them, I can't help but feel most of us don't!

Well, the better AF system with ITR, -3EV center point and 65 cross type points over like 50% of the sensor might be considered an advantage by some! I agree, though - unless you primarily shoot action (and can't afford a 1DX) the 5D3 or 6D is probably better for most people.

To the 5D-III punters... I can understand how the 5D-III can replace the 6D, but how exactly does the 5D-III replace a 7D-II?

Apart from fps what doesn't the 5D MkIII do that the 7D MkII can?

iTR tracking, AF points over a wider area of the VF, and light flicker compensation. That and fps would certainly make the 7D2 the better choice for some sports situations, but the 5D3 is no slouch in those situations.

The 7D2 will also remote control Canon flashes. Not a big deal, there are plenty of equipment options to add this to the 5D3.

For me, FPS, AF, reach and price are the main factors, i think that the proper replacement of 6D + 7DMKII in one body is the 1DX rather than the 5DMKIII, but of course the price is too high for me, i really consider getting the 5DMKIII, but with the reasons I stated before and a 5DMKIV looming ahead, i think its a better investment to get the 6D + 7DMKII, specially the 7DMKII since there will be mostly another 5 years of wait for a better one

 

[LovePhotography]

6D. No question.
Looking at the 6D vs 7DII still life at ISO 100 there is no comparison. 6D is better.
In fact, comparing the 7DII vs the T5i still life at ISO 100, the T5i is very marginally better, for $1200 less mula.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

 

[candc]

6D. No question.
Looking at the 6D vs 7DII still life at ISO 100 there is no comparison. 6D is better.
In fact, comparing the 7DII vs the T5i still life at ISO 100, the T5i is very marginally better, for $1200 less mula.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

You are right about the ir comparisons. The t5i still life 100 looks noticeably better than the 7dii or 70d, it also looks marginally better than the 6d. That seems peculiar, they are all in camera jpegs so I suspect there is some additional sharpening and contrast added in the t5i image?

 

[wickidwombat]

If you get the 6d you don't have to get a 24-70. Maybe the 16-35 f/4 plus your 50 and your 70-200 makes a great kit?

i agree with this since you will be going for landscapes etc with the 6D 24mm isnt wide enough

 

[meywd]

If you get the 6d you don't have to get a 24-70. Maybe the 16-35 f/4 plus your 50 and your 70-200 makes a great kit?

i agree with this since you will be going for landscapes etc with the 6D 24mm isnt wide enough

Well as i mentioned before, i will mostly get the samyang 14 f/2.8 for astrophotography so, this might cover that, until a time comes when i feel that i need the 16-35 or a 14-24 is released