Hey all, I am considering upgrading my current body. I have a t2i. I am thinking of making the switch to the 6D, but I am not sure if this would be the best thing to do. Would it be better to invest in glass and wait it out to the 6Dii? My current glass is 35mm f2, 50mm 1.8, and sigma 17-50mm f2.8/canon 75-300mm which I am planning to sell because both are not compatible with full frame. I considered the 7Dii because it would support my sigma 17-50 but I mostly shoot landscapes. Let me know your thoughts!
Upgrade current body or wait?
- Thread starter nobsphoto
- Start date
The 6D is currently around 30% cheaper than it was at launch almost two years. That makes it a great buy, you will only save more than that by going without it for longer. You Are already well on the way to having a set of full frame lenses, so could get good use out of the 6D straight away. Having both crop and full frame sensor cameras will also give each lens a dual identity. I have a 6D and 70-300, but am considering a crop body to give extra reach. You already have the crop camera, so would be buying in the opposite order.
I know that the usual advice is to spend money on glass, but in this case I believe from my own experience that you would be better able to assess your lens needs once you have the full frame body. Go for it, try out your 35, 50 and 70-300, then start thinking about future lens purchases. Having cut my SLR teeth with film at ISO 100 I am truly amazed by the performance of a modern digital sensor, and find that fast lenses are only needed for creative reasons. Once you have the 6D you can start to form your own judgements.
Whatever camera body you buy, you will be able to get something better and/or cheaper in a year or two time. When the 6D2 and 5D4 come along, the prices are likely to jump up at least initially - as the current prices of 7D vs. 7D2. When I bought my 6D, I could choose that or the 5D2 at similar retail price. That's not so true of lenses, but they are nothing without a body behind them.
I know that the usual advice is to spend money on glass, but in this case I believe from my own experience that you would be better able to assess your lens needs once you have the full frame body. Go for it, try out your 35, 50 and 70-300, then start thinking about future lens purchases. Having cut my SLR teeth with film at ISO 100 I am truly amazed by the performance of a modern digital sensor, and find that fast lenses are only needed for creative reasons. Once you have the 6D you can start to form your own judgements.
Whatever camera body you buy, you will be able to get something better and/or cheaper in a year or two time. When the 6D2 and 5D4 come along, the prices are likely to jump up at least initially - as the current prices of 7D vs. 7D2. When I bought my 6D, I could choose that or the 5D2 at similar retail price. That's not so true of lenses, but they are nothing without a body behind them.
Upvote
0
e17paul said:
Thanks for the suggestion! I agree. Do you have any experience with the kit(24-105mm)? I am debating if I should go with the body only or with the kit. The body with kit seems like a good deal when compared to purchasing them separaetly, but I am not sure if it would be better to save the money.
Upvote
0
nobsphoto said:
All versions of Canon EF 75-300 [and 70-300] lenses are fully compatible with full-frame sensor Canon DSLRs.
However, the EF 75-300/4-0-5.6 III is optically not a great performer. EF 70-300 IS is much better (and has IS).
If you don't need the reach, ultra-fast AF and fps of the 7D II, the 6D will be a good choice. But FF camera body is only half of what you need for better IQ. The other is lens/es), most likely wide-angle to standard for landscape.
The old EF 35/2 is not very wide, outdated and optically outclassed by the new IS primes [35/2 IS, 24 and 28/2.8 IS] and the new L zooms ... 16-35/4 L IS // 24-70/2.8 II // 24-70/4 L IS. Even the not super expensive EF 24-105/4 L and the new EF 24-105 STM [wait a bit on that one for more decent pricing] will deliver decent IQ.
Upvote
0
I ruled out the 24-105L because I could only just afford the body at first, and I have a preference for prime lenses with distance and depth of field scales. There is also distortion at extremes of the zoom range, but that can be corrected in camera or on the desktop. I know that many ate happy are happy with the 24-105L, including a journalist I know who uses his professionally. There is also the just announced 24-105 STM, which is lighter and has reported better IQ (reviews will be telling) but lacks weather sealing. The price is almost as high at launch, but I'm sure will settle down. Your existing lenses allow you to put off that decision until you have had the 6D for a while, although the kit price does give a small saving. You are only missing the wide option from your existing FF lenses.
I suggest that you go to a good camera shop with your 550D, 35, 50 and 70-300 to try them out on a 6D, and also try out the 24-105L. In my home town Calumet Euston and Park Cameras have both done that for me. I'm assuming from your reference to T2i and not 550D that you are in the US.
I don't regret refusing the kit 24-105L, but your preference may be different.
I suggest that you go to a good camera shop with your 550D, 35, 50 and 70-300 to try them out on a 6D, and also try out the 24-105L. In my home town Calumet Euston and Park Cameras have both done that for me. I'm assuming from your reference to T2i and not 550D that you are in the US.
I don't regret refusing the kit 24-105L, but your preference may be different.
Upvote
0
e17paul said:
All good points, and seconding the 24-105. If you are used to kit t2i glass this will be an improvement.
tayassu said:
Tokina is good, but I'll throw this thought out about the Sigma The sigma is better image quality than canon and has great AF, but it is 200 grams heavier. Plus you can get the canon in a white box for $300 cheaper if you are patient. 200 grams doesn't sound like a significant difference, but on a t2i it will feel very front heavy. Tried out both on my crop body (t4i), and it is a noticeable difference.
Upvote
0
My suggestion is don't wait. Get the 6D + 24-105L Kit in the next month or two in a killer sale deal and never look back. Enjoy them both. Very good combo and a very good value.
Upvote
0
By today's prices, 6D is a bargain, but requires lenses with decent sharpness at the image edges.
So do yourself a favor to yourself and get rid of the terrible 75-300mm. The bad news is that there is no substitute for Canon under $ 500. Tamron 70-300mm VC, seems to me the best value for money.
Your 17-50mm could be replaced by very good Canon 24-70 F4, which has less barrel distortion than the 24-105L.
If you can wait for the new Canon 24-105 STM, we'll find out if it has less distortion and good image quality.
The old 35mm F2 would not be very good in the corners of full frame cameras, and recommend one of atualidados 24, 28, 35 Image Stabilizer.
Its 50mm F1.8 would be replaced by the Canon 85mm F1.8.
As you can see, change your body to 6D is not very expensive. :
But spending to buy quality lenses.... :-X
So do yourself a favor to yourself and get rid of the terrible 75-300mm. The bad news is that there is no substitute for Canon under $ 500. Tamron 70-300mm VC, seems to me the best value for money.
Your 17-50mm could be replaced by very good Canon 24-70 F4, which has less barrel distortion than the 24-105L.
If you can wait for the new Canon 24-105 STM, we'll find out if it has less distortion and good image quality.
The old 35mm F2 would not be very good in the corners of full frame cameras, and recommend one of atualidados 24, 28, 35 Image Stabilizer.
Its 50mm F1.8 would be replaced by the Canon 85mm F1.8.
As you can see, change your body to 6D is not very expensive. :
But spending to buy quality lenses.... :-X
Upvote
0
nobsphoto said:
Which of those lenses aren't compatible with Full Frame? All of the Canon lenses you listed, I think are EF which are fully compatible with full-frame. Maybe I'm way off though. Probably worth the double-check?
+1 for getting the 6D-24-104mm kit. You really won't regret it. Plus, if you really don't like the 24-105... sell it as like-new and get $600+maybe more for it, then get a lens you really want. I think you'll really enjoy the switch to full-frame, and if 5d/1D are out of the range of reach on price (which I completely understand), you can't really go wrong with the 6D.
Upvote
0
Definitely make the upgrade to the 6D in the next few months. There will be lots of holiday deals and the price will not be better. I made the jump from a t1i and did not regret it. The 6D is the body for landscapers, although I think it is also great all-around.
Even though you prefer primes (so do I), you will not regret a good, L class, standard zoom. The 24-105 in the kit could be a good choice if the price is right. I opted to go for the body first and added the new 24-70 F4 instead, and I am very happy. I prefer it because it is lighter and smaller with the nifty macro mode. I am not a big landscape guy, but I think it is well-suited to that task. I bought a Canon refurb at $800 and you will probably see similar prices before Christmas. I have barely swapped lenses in the 6 months since I bought it. I tend towards the wide angles, and the lower distortion at 24mm (compared to the 24-105) really sold me.
Your 35 and 50 primes will take on new characteristics on full-frame, so I would wait before upgrading the primes. They will be wider than you are used to and have shallower depth of field. Between that and trying out the standard focal lengths covered by the L zoom, you can best decide what focal lengths you want to invest in for primes.
Even though you prefer primes (so do I), you will not regret a good, L class, standard zoom. The 24-105 in the kit could be a good choice if the price is right. I opted to go for the body first and added the new 24-70 F4 instead, and I am very happy. I prefer it because it is lighter and smaller with the nifty macro mode. I am not a big landscape guy, but I think it is well-suited to that task. I bought a Canon refurb at $800 and you will probably see similar prices before Christmas. I have barely swapped lenses in the 6 months since I bought it. I tend towards the wide angles, and the lower distortion at 24mm (compared to the 24-105) really sold me.
Your 35 and 50 primes will take on new characteristics on full-frame, so I would wait before upgrading the primes. They will be wider than you are used to and have shallower depth of field. Between that and trying out the standard focal lengths covered by the L zoom, you can best decide what focal lengths you want to invest in for primes.
Upvote
0
Thanks guys for all the suggestions, I think I am going to go with the 6D with the kit and try to sell the 17-50mm/75-300mm. If I am able to get a decent amount from selling the old lenses and save a little, I might try to get a 70-200mm to fill out the telephoto range or possibly get a 16-35 for landscapes. I will see what I need after using the kit. Would anyone recommend upgrading my current 35mm f2 to the IS version? I like primes, but I am not sure if it would be necessary to upgrade that lens or get an additional prime later on down the road.
Upvote
0
nobsphoto said:
Unless they're part of a trade or needed cash for upgrade to the 6D, I'd personally hold onto them and see how you like them first. A lens in hand is WAY cheaper than one you have to re-purchase.
Upvote
0
No reason not to get the 6D if like me you're a landscape shooter. Amazing sensor and great features. It doesn't have sports AF, that's about it. This time of year is probably going to be good for deals coming.
Be warned on the wide and ultra-wide end of things you're getting into money and weight. In terms of primes you have the Canon 20/2.8, Voigtlander 20/3.5 and then you're into Zeiss or uber-expensive tilt-shifts. The new 16-35/f4 zoom seems to be everyone's fave. It's expensive and fairly large compared to your apsc counterparts. Consider that you can get the apparently excellent optics of the newer Canon 10-18mm for your T2i and it's way smaller and lighter and about 1/4 the price. Some other trade-offs of course but just consider size, weight and cost that you'll be committing yourself to with full-frame.
Everyone's recommending the 24-105 but you say you like primes, and if you're into landscape I assume the wide end is a priority, where this lens doesn't shine.
I think the viewfinder experience with a full-frame camera is a significant benefit, especially if you're not into EVFs. You can get narrow depth of focus. And there is less noise at high iso. But are those priorities for you if you shoot landscapes? At smaller apertures and middle or low iso you're not likely to see dramatic differences between full-frame and apsc sized sensors these days. Tradeoffs...
Be warned on the wide and ultra-wide end of things you're getting into money and weight. In terms of primes you have the Canon 20/2.8, Voigtlander 20/3.5 and then you're into Zeiss or uber-expensive tilt-shifts. The new 16-35/f4 zoom seems to be everyone's fave. It's expensive and fairly large compared to your apsc counterparts. Consider that you can get the apparently excellent optics of the newer Canon 10-18mm for your T2i and it's way smaller and lighter and about 1/4 the price. Some other trade-offs of course but just consider size, weight and cost that you'll be committing yourself to with full-frame.
Everyone's recommending the 24-105 but you say you like primes, and if you're into landscape I assume the wide end is a priority, where this lens doesn't shine.
I think the viewfinder experience with a full-frame camera is a significant benefit, especially if you're not into EVFs. You can get narrow depth of focus. And there is less noise at high iso. But are those priorities for you if you shoot landscapes? At smaller apertures and middle or low iso you're not likely to see dramatic differences between full-frame and apsc sized sensors these days. Tradeoffs...
Upvote
0
Just a different view. Upgrading would be a good idea in the next few months but don’t rule out the crop sensor camera’s like the 60D that can be had refurbished for around $500. I bought mine refurbished for $431. The 7D can be had new for $999 right now. Landscapes do not always need a full frame body. The 6D is a nice camera but with only the center focus point being cross type it can be limiting for some applications although it would be good for landscapes. Have your cash handy. Expect a “Black Friday” sale of some sort. Good glass may also become a sale item.
Upvote
0
Mr_Canuck said:
A pretty good non-canon alternative for UWA prime is the 14mm rokinon/samyang. Very wide angle, pretty darn sharp and also affordable... drawbacks are that you have to get comfortable with a manual setup (aperture and focus are on the lens), but honestly for landscapes, you won't really notice any significant drawback, especially with the extra $2000 in your pocket from not buying Canon's equivalent focal length. It's infinity focus is at about 14-15 feet (if I recall correctly) and stopping it down a couple of f-stops for depth of field sharpness, and I bet you won't know that AF isn't there. If you're at all into night time star shots, it's about as good as it gets... especially for the money.
Upvote
0
I do in fact have two 6D's both of which I've used with the 14mm Rokinon flavor of the Samyang/rokinon lens.
I don't have any good examples to post from my office (no access to my files).
I'm currently waiting for a new copy of the 14mm lens which should arrive today. I had bought a used copy off of craigslist that had a small chip in the front element (one of the drawbacks to a bulbous element)... wanted to get one that was pristine and B&H has them for $300 right now with free shipping.
Again, it's a manual lens, so you have to be comfortable with that, but it is as sharp or sharper than canon's version, especially away from the center of the image. It has pretty significant distortion due to the fish-eye nature of the lens, but I haven't had a problem correcting it in post.
For the money, I can't say enough good things about it. It's about a $2000 savings over Canon's version (which you get AF etc).
As I use as a basis for my photography hobby purchases - I don't sell photos (yet)... so I don't have income to offset the gear purchases... if you have the money and the means, Canon's L lenses are really the best in many ways. If not, this is a pretty good step in the right direction for UWA. Another good choice at about $600 used is the 17-40L. Again, that's 2x the price of the Rokinon. I have and use a Tamron 17-35mm that I got off of craigslist... no complaints. It's pretty sharp and does a good job too. The 14mm is sharper though.
I don't have any good examples to post from my office (no access to my files).
I'm currently waiting for a new copy of the 14mm lens which should arrive today. I had bought a used copy off of craigslist that had a small chip in the front element (one of the drawbacks to a bulbous element)... wanted to get one that was pristine and B&H has them for $300 right now with free shipping.
Again, it's a manual lens, so you have to be comfortable with that, but it is as sharp or sharper than canon's version, especially away from the center of the image. It has pretty significant distortion due to the fish-eye nature of the lens, but I haven't had a problem correcting it in post.
For the money, I can't say enough good things about it. It's about a $2000 savings over Canon's version (which you get AF etc).
As I use as a basis for my photography hobby purchases - I don't sell photos (yet)... so I don't have income to offset the gear purchases... if you have the money and the means, Canon's L lenses are really the best in many ways. If not, this is a pretty good step in the right direction for UWA. Another good choice at about $600 used is the 17-40L. Again, that's 2x the price of the Rokinon. I have and use a Tamron 17-35mm that I got off of craigslist... no complaints. It's pretty sharp and does a good job too. The 14mm is sharper though.
Upvote
0
nobsphoto said:
I would suggest waiting because the current Canon products are obsolete. If you are going to get rid of your lenses anyway, consider moving to a different manufacturer with greater vision than Canon since you have the opportunity to do so now with minimal pain.
If you are shooting with a T2i and are reasonably happy with the images it produces, cameras such as the 6D and 7D2 do not significantly improve on that. A better question would be why specifically do you want a replacement camera, and what specifically do you expect to get from that. That will help guide your choice.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
