Replacement 400d - 650d vs. 6d

[RadioPath]

Hi everyone,
been a lurker for some time, great forum, would love to get your advice.

I've been shooting with a 400d (Rebel XTi?) since 2007 and have been happy enough with the size, handling and IQ outdoors. I have an EF 28-135 IS and an EF 50 1.4 and a Speed Lite 580.
I feel like it's time for an update. The things I'm missing most are low-light capabilities (I try not to go over ISO 400 and only use ISO 800 when REALLY needed), so I'm often stuck with my 50 mm lens indoors. I love that little lens, but on a crop body I would just need something wider. Would also love a better auto-focus since currently 90 % of the pics I take are of my toddler, second one on the way.

Now there are two possibilities I thought of:
Get a 6d, that way my lenses would be more wide-angle, I'd have amazing low light possibilities and an improved auto focus. Might want to add a 100 mm Macro (non-L) since I'd like a Macro lens anyways and I could use it for portraits as well. Cons: Size (quite happy only shlepping a Rebel around), price. Not sure how much better the auto focus would do. Otoh would focus in low light.

The alternative would be 650d/700d or 100d. Pro: Somewhat improved light sensitivity, the question is just how much compared to what I currently have. Also smaller size compared to a 6d. Would have money left over to buy new lenses. As an extreme example 600€ for a 650d plus 2100€ for a 24-70 2.8 Lii is the same as a 1800€ 6d plus a 900€ 24-105 4L

The other question would be whether it would make sense to still use my 28-135? I'm happy with the image quality but would it be the same on a FF sensor? (On the one hand bigger pixels, but on the other hand more vignetting?) The other question would be how much IQ I would give up on on a 6D. If not: What replacement to get? What "resolution" would that lense have? When I replace in a couple of years, would I have to buy new again?

Money is a factor, I would not be making any money with that equipment and in all likelihood won't in the future. The question is therefore more how much more light sensitivity, IQ and auto focus improvement I would get in a 6D, and whether it's worth the extra cash.

Thanks a lot
RadioPath

 

[Loswr]

Sell your 400D and 28-135mm. Buy 6D kit with 24-105L lens. You've got the 50/1.4 for low light ambient and portraits, and the 580 to bounce off the celiing indoors as well. Some improvement in AF, big improvement in high ISO performance, shallower DoF for portraits.

 

[RadioPath]

@Neuroanatomist: Good idea, but since I wouldn't get all that much for the 400d (<150€) I might keep it; not bad to have a second body, especially since I try to get my wife into photography
I'm undecided whether I could afford the 24-105 at the same time as a new body, at least if it's a 6D. (I.e. I do have the money but there are plenty of other fun things in life that require my hard earned cash ) How much would I lose out on in terms of IQ if I were to postpone it? Mine doesn't have issues with barrel creep and the build quality is good enough for me.

 

[meli]

you could also look at the 5dmk2

 

[RadioPath]

you could also look at the 5dmk2

The 5d ii is pretty much the same price here, unfortunately. Also, not having used either, the 6d seems to be considerably better for what I need (High-ISO), the Auto Focus migh and I personally find GPS and WiFi to be really neat features (still don't understand why Canon didn't put them in the 700D). Also: I'm used to a Rebel so I'd like the Body to be as small as reasonably archievable...
Forgot to add: Wouldn't want to buy used gear and I don't think they have Refurb stuff here.

 

[paul13walnut5]

The 1.6x crop of a 650D would actually be pretty useful for macro work, it's not the same thing as increasing the magnification technicall, but the desirable upshot is a greater working distance. The 100mm will behave like a 150 focal length. True tele macros are very expensive.. one arguement for staying cropped sensor.

I moved from a 400D to a 7D which was backed up with a 550D and now a 600D. 600D is cheap now, has fold out screen, wireless E-TTL flash (you can use your 580ex gun wirelessly off camera..very useful for your macro work!) which the 6D lacks (uses radio flash instead, you would need a new gun)

Higher ISO's are better, and there are more of them. In practise, and with some LUMA NR at the raw conversion stage my 600D can deliver great results at 1600 and good results at 3200. How much higher do you need?

I would ditch the 28-135 as it makes little sense on aps-c. Go for a nice fast short zoom, something like the Tamron 18-50 f2.8. Will really make the most of the AF.

You can get great results for modest cost, and a biggie for me would be the potential to model the 580 off camera. This can make up for low ISO to some degree.

With whichever EOS camera you buy learn to use the AF system properly. My advice is to select the centre AF point only. Select AiServo mode. Track, track, shoot a burst, track track shoot a burst. You'll find your keeper rate goes way up. Even more so the faster the lens you put on it.

 

[babiesphotos.ca]

@Neuroanatomist: Good idea, but since I wouldn't get all that much for the 400d (<150€) I might keep it; not bad to have a second body, especially since I try to get my wife into photography
I'm undecided whether I could afford the 24-105 at the same time as a new body, at least if it's a 6D. (I.e. I do have the money but there are plenty of other fun things in life that require my hard earned cash ) How much would I lose out on in terms of IQ if I were to postpone it? Mine doesn't have issues with barrel creep and the build quality is good enough for me.

If you get 6D, you won't use 400d. I know as I went through similar experience.

In terms of IQ, real IQ gains is at higher ISOs, and of course effect of shallower depth of field. I had 30D and I feel that ISO 800 on 30D was probably equal to ISO 12800 on 6D. Compared to 400D, I'm not sure, but it will be at least 4 times better. At least, maybe 8 times.

And as for focus, I take pictures of toddlers. When they get closer to 2 year old, they are truly hard to catch. So hard that I had 5D Mark III, and found it only a bit better than 6D. i.e. 6D autofocus is good enough. And quality of the picture is really spectacular.

I'd rather have 6D and 50 1.4, than any current crop sensor camera and bunch of L lenses...

 

[Skirball]

I moved from a 400D to a 7D which was backed up with a 550D and now a 600D. 600D is cheap now, has fold out screen, wireless E-TTL flash (you can use your 580ex gun wirelessly off camera..very useful for your macro work!) which the 6D lacks (uses radio flash instead, you would need a new gun)

Are you talking about using the Canon optical trigger system? I don't know how reliable that's going to be at macro distances or out in the sun. I think you'd be better off dropping $25 for some manual radio triggers or a cable if you need TTL.

 

[RadioPath]

The 1.6x crop of a 650D would actually be pretty useful for macro work, it's not the same thing as increasing the magnification technicall, but the desirable upshot is a greater working distance. The 100mm will behave like a 150 focal length. True tele macros are very expensive.. one arguement for staying cropped sensor.

I moved from a 400D to a 7D which was backed up with a 550D and now a 600D. 600D is cheap now, has fold out screen, wireless E-TTL flash (you can use your 580ex gun wirelessly off camera..very useful for your macro work!) which the 6D lacks (uses radio flash instead, you would need a new gun)

Higher ISO's are better, and there are more of them. In practise, and with some LUMA NR at the raw conversion stage my 600D can deliver great results at 1600 and good results at 3200. How much higher do you need?

I would ditch the 28-135 as it makes little sense on aps-c. Go for a nice fast short zoom, something like the Tamron 18-50 f2.8. Will really make the most of the AF.

You can get great results for modest cost, and a biggie for me would be the potential to model the 580 off camera. This can make up for low ISO to some degree.

With whichever EOS camera you buy learn to use the AF system properly. My advice is to select the centre AF point only. Select AiServo mode. Track, track, shoot a burst, track track shoot a burst. You'll find your keeper rate goes way up. Even more so the faster the lens you put on it.

I'm not doing that much Macro stuff (basically none so far). I just thought I would need a new portrait lens (current 50 1.4 = 85 mm or so on APS-C) and get the Macro as a bonus. Then again one never knows. My sister in law has a 600d; would probably go up to 1600 on that one, so I would gain 2 stops. Was there any improvement in the 650D (same sensor?).
As to the flash: Didn't know about the triggering, but I'd first have to learn how to use it off camera. I tend to avoid flash if I can, b/c when looking at the pictures afterwards I often have the feeling that the lighting of the scene (which might have been part of why I want to shoot something) gets destroyed somewhat. Might be based on technique, though. This is a hobby for me and I don't have anywhere near as much time as I'd like to have for it.
I want to be cautious about APS-C lenses, b/c there is always the chance that I want to move FF (just as I'm considering now ) and then I'm stuck with them.

@babiesphotos.ca: I thought more of giving the 400d to my wife She's got small hands anyways... I like the 400D for its size, it feels much smaller and lighter than a 600d/650d/700d, especially with the 50 1.4. Would be even cooler with a 40 2.8 I guess. The 30D is basically the same size as a 6D, no?

Still unsure about the 28-135: On FF it would be a really nice focal length, my question is just whether the resolution is high enough for the new sensor. Any way to find out? I know that L glass would be much nicer, but to add another 900sth € should be well thought out (I'd also have to convince my wife).

As for 6D vs. 650D: The difference in ISO would be 2 -3 stops? Or even more?

Thanks guys
RadioPath

 

[swannd]

Hi Radiopath,

Last year I did a similar upgrade 400D to a 5DIII. The difference is much bigger than I had hoped, so i recommend it. I am biased to FF as I only saw crop sensors as a temporary measure until the sensor price could be made reasonable.

When I upgraded, I could only afford the body, so I went back to using my old 28-105 f3.5-4.5 from the film days. Your 28-135 is a bit better again. Overall it was a decent improvement on the old setup, but I have finally just purchased the 24-105L. Before that I grabbed the 17-40L which has been great and my first super-wide (it just made me realise that the old lens wasn't holding up too well anymore.

Anyway, I'd suggest that you consider the 6D, with some later lens purchases when the funds are available. Your 50mm will shine on a 6D (and a 85 or 100mm would be a great addition)

Swanny.

 

[RadioPath]

@swannd: I knew I wouldn't be the only one in that situation How much of a step up is that L lens really? Again, build quality doesn't matter THAT much.

BTW: I actually also considered buying a 17-40 a while back to use as a general lens as for now and having it as a UWA later Ended up buying the 50 mm and flash instead. Might also be an idea: 600 € 650D, 700€ 17-40 4.0 and a 50 € Ef 100 2.8 Macro. Wouldn't give me low light wide angle, though. Then again, more lenses to toy around with.

Added: Also, the 6D will drop in price, but then again everything does and during the time spent waiting I could take pictures. Especially since the silent mode sounds amazing to take pictures of new born babies.

 

[BrettS]

The 30D is basically the same size as a 6D, no?

Yes, they're pretty much identical in size, weight, dimensions, feel in your hand. (I have both.)

 

[bholliman]

Neuro's advise to buy a 6D with a 24-105mm kit lens is excellent. Buying the 24-105 with the camera, you are getting it for roughly $200 off the price of buying both separately - a terrific deal.

If you don't want to spend that much now, the 6D will take awesome pictures with your 50 1.4 and your 28-135 will be good enough until you can afford to upgrade to a better quality zoom or expand your collection of primes.

I got a 6D after owning a T2i and later a 7D, which i still have. My 7D is a great camera outdoors for fast moving subjects, but the 6D opens up a whole new world of indoor and low-light options that were not possible on my APS-C cameras. I take lots of indoor shots of our 12-month old son and the 6D / 50 1.4mm combination is fantastic! Full frame image quality is a huge step up from APS-C in my opinion.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[RadioPath]

Seems that most ppl here would favour a 6D. I read somewhere here that there will be Canon rebates around here in May, let's see, maybe there will be a possibility for a 24-105 as well, although there are always these little things on top that need updating when buying a new stuff (bag, SD-card, etc.).

Just one more question for the 24-105 4.0: With that aperture the DoF would be comparable to what on a crop sensor? 2.8?

Thanks a bunch for the advice, already looking forward to my new cam

RadioPath

 

[Loswr]

Just one more question for the 24-105 4.0: With that aperture the DoF would be comparable to what on a crop sensor? 2.8?

For the same framing, f/4 on FF is like f/2.5 on APS-C.

 

[tomscott]

You have to remember with the 28-135mm that on APC it is 44mm at its widest! Which means you have nothing close to wide angle on your current system.

The 400D was in the same class as the 40D with a little noise reduction 1600 is useable. Depends what your using the camera for. Do you print? How big? or do you use post mostly on the internet? If the latter 1600 on the 400D is perfectly useable for screen.

If you were to buy a 6D you could use your 28-135mm and be fairly happy. Although the 24-105 is better and a perfect partner for the 6D.

IMO if I was you I would buy a 7D, sell the 28-135mm because it makes no sense at all using it on a crop camera. Buy a 17-40mm L or a 17-55mm and a wide angle like the 10-22mm then you will be completely sorted for a similar price.

 

[swannd]

Hi Radiopath,

Good call getting the 50mm, although you'll love getting a wider lens.

I only received the 24-105 a couple of weeks ago, so I don't have enough experience to give you any useful information about it.

Instead, I'll let you know that I have taken some really good photos with the old 28-105 thanks to the 5D's inbuilt lens correction software; just like the 6D. You can have this already with the 400D shooting raw with DPP (and probably other software too). The 400D was lready hitting the limits of this lens - however it was only using the central portion of the lens - moving to full frame at twice the resolution wasn't as bad as I thought - and your lens should be better again.

It is a significant step-up then using the 17-40, both in feel and contrast/detail. I do love to zoom-in (pixel-peep) and see all the great detail - whether it be leaves on a tree or the detail in the iris. For really great shots I then add DLO in DPP which normally means there is no need for any sharpening. Not a perfect lens (none are) with poor extereme corners at 17mm, but 17mm is w i d e.

The combination is another world from using the 400D.

By the way, I keep my 400D for my wife, loaning to friends who don't own SLRs (that gets them interested) and as a point-and-shoot (when compared to the 5D + 24-105)

Swanny.

 

[RadioPath]

You have to remember with the 28-135mm that on APC it is 44mm at its widest! Which means you have nothing close to wide angle on your current system.

The 400D was in the same class as the 40D with a little noise reduction 1600 is useable. Depends what your using the camera for. Do you print? How big? or do you use post mostly on the internet? If the latter 1600 on the 400D is perfectly useable for screen.

If you were to buy a 6D you could use your 28-135mm and be fairly happy. Although the 24-105 is better and a perfect partner for the 6D.

IMO if I was you I would buy a 7D, sell the 28-135mm because it makes no sense at all using it on a crop camera. Buy a 17-40mm L or a 17-55mm and a wide angle like the 10-22mm then you will be completely sorted for a similar price.

I still love to print pictures, both for myself and family; found 13x18 (5x7") to be the best compromise but also like A4 for some shots. I'm not even happy with 9x13 (3.5x5") prints at ISO 1600. For the web they are more than good enough though, I agree.

The 7D would be sort of the same IQ as a 650D, I guess? The question is how well the Auto Focus would do in low light, b/c that's when I have most problems. Does it compare to the FF options? A 7D and a 17-40 would be only slightly more expensive than a 6D body. Better Auto Focus but not that much low light capabilities?

@Swanny: How well does that built-in lens correction work? Sounds pretty sweet, since I'm not shooting Raw, yet. Would want to start with the new camera. Although I'd need Aperture or LR, more HD space, a better screen, possibly more RAM.... oy vey
Cool that you understand why I wanna keep the 400D. Wish I could just update that sensor in it to FF

 

[paul13walnut5]

If you want decent AF then you need to ditch the medium/slow max aperture zoom.

Period.

You don't need to shoot wide open to get the AF benefits of a faster lens on any EOS body.

Seriously. Ditch the slow zoom.

 

[RadioPath]

If you want decent AF then you need to ditch the medium/slow max aperture zoom.

Period.

You don't need to shoot wide open to get the AF benefits of a faster lens on any EOS body.

Seriously. Ditch the slow zoom.

I'm not sure if I understand correctly (not a pro and no optical engineering background ) Would a 24-105 also be slow in AF, since max aperture would be similar to my current zoom (3.5 vs. 4.0)?
Thanks