Should I buy 6d or 5MkIII?

[MrVeda]

I am a real estate broker looking to upgrade from Nikon to Canon to take better pics of large homes and wide angle shots of interior rooms.

Will the 6D take as good pics using the same ultra wide angle lens as the 5Mk3 would?

I understand the 5Mk3 is a much better more sophisticated camera but if the results are the same for stills, I much prefer the smaller lighter body (and lower price!). The pics are used mostly online for virtual Tours and marketing.

Thanks for any advice

 

[candyman]

6D is the right camera for your purpose. Invest in L-quality glass for wide angle.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I am a real estate broker looking to upgrade from Nikon to Canon to take better pics of large homes and wide angle shots of interior rooms.

Will the 6D take as good pics using the same ultra wide angle lens as the 5Mk3 would?

I understand the 5Mk3 is a much better more sophisticated camera but if the results are the same for stills, I much prefer the smaller lighter body (and lower price!). The pics are used mostly online for virtual Tours and marketing.

Thanks for any advice

Is it for Video?

That's where Canon is much better. There are complaints about the 6D for video. You do realize there is no autofocus during a video. Only the 70D has reasonable autofocus during video. Otherwise, its going to be a lot of work, and a lot of focusing aids like external monitors, focus pullers, magnifiers, etc. You take a scene, then turn the camera to another, setup your focus and take another. Continupous video that is sharp, or zooming during he video is not going to come out well.

Get a 70D for video, there are wide lenses for it.

If you don't need video, there is no advantage over Nikon.

 

[MrVeda]

Thanks for the quick responses. I had not considered Video but you are absolutely right - I should be moving in that direction. I should have mentioned I am coming from an older 3200 Nikon with Cropped Wide Angle limitations and was hoping the full frame would give me more professional looking pics.

My aim was to invest in a new body and also the Canon Ultra Wide L series lens

 

[BL]

get the 6D and use the savings to buy a nice tilt shift

 

[CarlTN]

I am a real estate broker looking to upgrade from Nikon to Canon to take better pics of large homes and wide angle shots of interior rooms.

Will the 6D take as good pics using the same ultra wide angle lens as the 5Mk3 would?

I understand the 5Mk3 is a much better more sophisticated camera but if the results are the same for stills, I much prefer the smaller lighter body (and lower price!). The pics are used mostly online for virtual Tours and marketing.

Thanks for any advice

How about instead, hiring a local pro photographer to do your shots? We need the work...

 

[mycanonphotos]

Yeah, 6D will be perfect for you.

 

[jdramirez]

I am a real estate broker looking to upgrade from Nikon to Canon to take better pics of large homes and wide angle shots of interior rooms.

Will the 6D take as good pics using the same ultra wide angle lens as the 5Mk3 would?

I understand the 5Mk3 is a much better more sophisticated camera but if the results are the same for stills, I much prefer the smaller lighter body (and lower price!). The pics are used mostly online for virtual Tours and marketing.

Thanks for any advice

6D... no doubt about it. The house isn't going to be moving... unless maybe it is a mobile home... but you'd probably just use a camera phone to sell one of those.

 

[Don Haines]

get the 6D and use the savings to buy a nice tilt shift

+1 on that!

The tilt/shift lens will have more impact on your photos that going from a 6D to a 5D3 will.... and don't forget to shoot in RAW and get some decent editing software.

 

[jdramirez]

get the 6D and use the savings to buy a nice tilt shift

+1 on that!

The tilt/shift lens will have more impact on your photos that going from a 6D to a 5D3 will.... and don't forget to shoot in RAW and get some decent editing software.

I wish I understood the draw of a tilt shift.

 

[Don Haines]

get the 6D and use the savings to buy a nice tilt shift

+1 on that!

The tilt/shift lens will have more impact on your photos that going from a 6D to a 5D3 will.... and don't forget to shoot in RAW and get some decent editing software.

I wish I understood the draw of a tilt shift.

On a normal lens, the plane of focus is parallel to the sensor, but when you tilt/shift the lens, you shift the plane of focus. Say you are photographing a tall building from near the base... when you take a picture, the middle of the building is in focus but the top and the bottom are not. Also, the sides of the building are not straight. With the tilt/zoom you can change the plane of focus to be more inline with the building and more of it will be in focus.... and the sides will be straighter.

The effect is not as pronounced as with a 4x5 camera and the tilt/swivel lens plane coupled by bellows to the tilt/swivel film plane, but it does allow some interesting manipulations of the image. The convergence of lines can be played with and corrected in lightroom or photoshop, but not the plane of focus.

I'm far more familiar with the 4x5 than the Canon tilt/shift lenses, having only played with them at a show. I hope someone with real experience with them pipes up

 

[jdramirez]

get the 6D and use the savings to buy a nice tilt shift

+1 on that!

The tilt/shift lens will have more impact on your photos that going from a 6D to a 5D3 will.... and don't forget to shoot in RAW and get some decent editing software.

I wish I understood the draw of a tilt shift.

On a normal lens, the plane of focus is parallel to the sensor, but when you tilt/shift the lens, you shift the plane of focus. Say you are photographing a tall building from near the base... when you take a picture, the middle of the building is in focus but the top and the bottom are not. Also, the sides of the building are not straight. With the tilt/zoom you can change the plane of focus to be more inline with the building and more of it will be in focus.... and the sides will be straighter.

The effect is not as pronounced as with a 4x5 camera and the tilt/swivel lens plane coupled by bellows to the tilt/swivel film plane, but it does allow some interesting manipulations of the image. The convergence of lines can be played with and corrected in lightroom or photoshop, but not the plane of focus.

I'm far more familiar with the 4x5 than the Canon tilt/shift lenses, having only played with them at a show. I hope someone with real experience with them pipes up

I understand tilt shifts... I don't understand... or should I say... I don't share the interest/draw that people have for it.

 

[privatebydesign]

A tilt shift is not good advice for the OP.

The 6D and 17-40, a Manfrotto 055 with a 410 geared head plus three flashes, I'd suggest YN-560 III's and a 603 II trigger, couple of stands and a Justin clamp. Oh, and this eBook http://photographyforrealestate.net/lighting/

For the vast majority of real estate shooting size and absolute IQ is not a factor, MLS limits are often very small and 1024 px images are normal, any advantage a tilt shift can give could be done in post to these sizes and larger. The only time a tilt shift is a good buy is if the clients are demanding higher quality for posters and architectural images, magazines, things like that.

At this point in time the majority of my income is from real estate photography, specifically for developers, they demand high IQ as they output in print and posters etc as well as websites. I use the 17 TS-E, mostly for interiors, but don't require the movements that much, exteriors normally need a longer focal length.

As for shift use, well as Don says, in real estate it is mainly used for keeping walls straight when shooting taller lines, it doesn't actually change the plane of focus any, that is always parallel to the plane of the sensor until you use tilt, but tilt has very limited use in real estate work, much more in architectural imaging. I use shift to get less ceiling and more floor space in the image whilst keeping the optimal viewing height, but you can fake that with a wider lens and crop.

 

[Grumbaki]

I understand tilt shifts... I don't understand... or should I say... I don't share the interest/draw that people have for it.

To have architecture shots that don't look like laws of physics are turned off?

If you only do rural stuff then there is no point but for cityscapes of skyscraper, with little ability to shoot from (very) far or to fly (or find a vantage point) then TSE is the key...

 

[Don Haines]

A tilt shift is not good advice for the OP.

The 6D and 17-40, a Manfrotto 055 with a 410 geared head plus three flashes, I'd suggest YN-560 III's and a 603 II trigger, couple of stands and a Justin clamp. Oh, and this eBook http://photographyforrealestate.net/lighting/

For the vast majority of real estate shooting size and absolute IQ is not a factor, MLS limits are often very small and 1024 px images are normal, any advantage a tilt shift can give could be done in post to these sizes and larger. The only time a tilt shift is a good buy is if the clients are demanding higher quality for posters and architectural images, magazines, things like that.

At this point in time the majority of my income is from real estate photography, specifically for developers, they demand high IQ as they output in print and posters etc as well as websites. I use the 17 TS-E, mostly for interiors, but don't require the movements that much, exteriors normally need a longer focal length.

As for shift use, well as Don says, in real estate it is mainly used for keeping walls straight when shooting taller lines, it doesn't actually change the plane of focus any, that is always parallel to the plane of the sensor until you use tilt, but tilt has very limited use in real estate work, much more in architectural imaging. I use shift to get less ceiling and more floor space in the image whilst keeping the optimal viewing height, but you can fake that with a wider lens and crop.

Great to hear from someone who is using the gear for the intended purpose....

 

[wickidwombat]

A tilt shift is not good advice for the OP.

The 6D and 17-40, a Manfrotto 055 with a 410 geared head plus three flashes, I'd suggest YN-560 III's and a 603 II trigger, couple of stands and a Justin clamp. Oh, and this eBook http://photographyforrealestate.net/lighting/

For the vast majority of real estate shooting size and absolute IQ is not a factor, MLS limits are often very small and 1024 px images are normal, any advantage a tilt shift can give could be done in post to these sizes and larger. The only time a tilt shift is a good buy is if the clients are demanding higher quality for posters and architectural images, magazines, things like that.

At this point in time the majority of my income is from real estate photography, specifically for developers, they demand high IQ as they output in print and posters etc as well as websites. I use the 17 TS-E, mostly for interiors, but don't require the movements that much, exteriors normally need a longer focal length.

As for shift use, well as Don says, in real estate it is mainly used for keeping walls straight when shooting taller lines, it doesn't actually change the plane of focus any, that is always parallel to the plane of the sensor until you use tilt, but tilt has very limited use in real estate work, much more in architectural imaging. I use shift to get less ceiling and more floor space in the image whilst keeping the optimal viewing height, but you can fake that with a wider lens and crop.

I'm gonna agree with PBD here except i'm gonna add that I think another choice for the OP would be an EOS-M and the 11-22 IS STM lens seriously this combo is not that far off a 5Dmk3 and 16-35 f2.8L II ! I think the 11-22 has sharper corners! I understand its not nearly as impressive looking a setup or does not look as pro but I am being blown away by how good this combo is.

BUT unfortunately the shadow recovery of the crop sensor on the EOS-M is considerably worse than the FF
so it also highly depends on how you are going to process.

Using HDR? bracketing to cover the DR issues and enfuse to process then the EOS-M and 11-22 will be just fine.
Trying to do it in a single shot? then the 6D will definitely have a noticeable advantage. Or as PBD says use speed lights to fill in the shadows

 

[MrVeda]

Wow - thanks for all the great feedback - much appreciated.

I'm leaning towards the 6d with the Canon 16-35mm UWA using Aperature for post editing. I've read tons to support the extra cost over the 17-40mm is well worth the investment. The quality of pics are used primarily for online marketing but much more high res than for MLS purposes. Pics have to be uploaded in high res for full screen slideshows.

Is there a specific uv filter that will give a good all round use for interior and exterior shots to suit stills of rooms?

Thanks again!

 

[jdramirez]

Wow - thanks for all the great feedback - much appreciated.

I'm leaning towards the 6d with the Canon 16-35mm UWA using Aperature for post editing. I've read tons to support the extra cost over the 17-40mm is well worth the investment. The quality of pics are used primarily for online marketing but much more high res than for MLS purposes. Pics have to be uploaded in high res for full screen slideshows.

Is there a specific uv filter that will give a good all round use for interior and exterior shots to suit stills of rooms?

Thanks again!

I use hoods rather than uv filters... and the 16-35 comes with a hood... You might want to onsider a cpl filter for exterior shots... but I wouldn't suggest a UV... though others may suggest otherwise...

 

[privatebydesign]

Wow - thanks for all the great feedback - much appreciated.

I'm leaning towards the 6d with the Canon 16-35mm UWA using Aperature for post editing. I've read tons to support the extra cost over the 17-40mm is well worth the investment. The quality of pics are used primarily for online marketing but much more high res than for MLS purposes. Pics have to be uploaded in high res for full screen slideshows.

Is there a specific uv filter that will give a good all round use for interior and exterior shots to suit stills of rooms?

Thanks again!

For real estate shooting f8 and smaller, there is absolutely zero benefit of the 16-35 over the 17-40, indeed the 17-40 has a better zoom range as 35-40 is more useful than 16-17, trust me on this one, the 17-40 is a better lens for you (and me).

Even full sized tv screens are only 2 and a bit MP, a computer screen a bit more. A 4K screen, which almost nobody has is a mere 8MP, so keep perspective on what you actually need IQ wise, these forums do have a lot of people very gear and ultimate IQ orientated, overkill is expensive!

As for the software, I got on much better with Lightroom than Aperture, and everybody that makes imaging software plugins makes a version for Adobe, whereas Apple and independent developers seem to let Aperture slide too often.

Depending on the results you are after Aperture and Lightroom might not give you the capabilities you need, if you link to some images you would like to achieve I'll tell you what techniques were used to do it, this will help you plan your overall strategy.

I don't use UV filters, with such varying light sources encountered in real estate, and the fact that it is not a demanding climate (dust, dirt, ran, sea spray etc) they can only diminish your output. A polarizer can be a very useful filter though for controlling reflections and glare on wood floors, counter tops etc.

 

[jdramirez]

Wow - thanks for all the great feedback - much appreciated.

I'm leaning towards the 6d with the Canon 16-35mm UWA using Aperature for post editing. I've read tons to support the extra cost over the 17-40mm is well worth the investment. The quality of pics are used primarily for online marketing but much more high res than for MLS purposes. Pics have to be uploaded in high res for full screen slideshows.

Is there a specific uv filter that will give a good all round use for interior and exterior shots to suit stills of rooms?

Thanks again!

For real estate shooting f8 and smaller, there is absolutely zero benefit of the 16-35 over the 17-40, indeed the 17-40 has a better zoom range as 35-40 is more useful than 16-17, trust me on this one, the 17-40 is a better lens for you (and me).

Even full sized tv screens are only 2 and a bit MP, a computer screen a bit more. A 4K screen, which almost nobody has is a mere 8MP, so keep perspective on what you actually need IQ wise, these forums do have a lot of people very gear and ultimate IQ orientated, overkill is expensive!

As for the software, I got on much better with Lightroom than Aperture, and everybody that makes imaging software plugins makes a version for Adobe, whereas Apple and independent developers seem to let Aperture slide too often.

Depending on the results you are after Aperture and Lightroom might not give you the capabilities you need, if you link to some images you would like to achieve I'll tell you what techniques were used to do it, this will help you plan your overall strategy.

I don't use UV filters, with such varying light sources encountered in real estate, and the fact that it is not a demanding climate (dust, dirt, ran, sea spray etc) they can only diminish your output. A polarizer can be a very useful filter though for controlling reflections and glare on wood floors, counter tops etc.

I was reading the 4K sony post earlier with the 12mp camera... and I believe they were saying is that 4K=12mp because it was a 1:1 ratio... pixel for pixel.

I don't care.. but I want to make sure it is right before I lock 12 MP = 4K before I lock it into my memory.