Upgrade time dilemma

[Dugways]

So I've been running with a EOS T3 (without the i. Other wise know as the 1100D) for about two years now and I finally have some cash to invest in some upgrades. My problem is that I cant choose between the 60D, 70D and 5DII. I would probably be buying these used and I'm not sure if I should spring the extra money for the 5DII. I'm a 17 year old amateur with a summer job wanting to upgrade before I go off to university, so whatever I choose will have to last a few years. I also really dont have much in the way of glass, just the kit 18-55mm and F1.8 50mm but deciding on a new lens kind of depends on what body I decide to go with. My sweet spot for a price would probably be in the 700-800 range, but if the 5D is really worth it, I could stretch for it (Well, more like double for it). So I'm curious for your opinions on the matter, do I get the 5D and shoot with my nifty fifty until I can get a good lens, do I get the 60D and some nice glass, or grab the 70D and stick with my kit lens for a while?
I've attached some of my photos to give you guys kind of a sense of what I like to shoot

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I do think a FF body will be a advantage. Don't forget the original 5D for about $350. Its still a fine camera. As for a 5D MK II, they should be under $1000, but there are some over priced ones out there. You can get a new 6D for $1099. Watch for a $699 price for a new 70D.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/321196707464?item=321196707464&lgeo=1&vectorid=229466&rmvSB=true

Figure out what you want, make sure you have funds, set your price, and wait. Come September, prices always drop.

 

[Kristofgss]

Have you considered the original 7D? It has very good autofocus, and can be found really cheap with the introduction of the 7DII. They are built very sturdy and will give you years of shooting fun in all weather conditions.

Advantage of a crop frame is that you have access to cheap primes like the ef-s 60 and ef-s 24. and combined with the nifty fifty, it has pretty nice results. It also has a very nice focus system like the 70D

 

[ksgal]

Doug, the right question is - in what ways is my current body limiting my photography?

Have you pushed the body to its limits of what it can do? Or maybe are you more limited by what your lenses can do? I didn't upgrade past my 50D until I finally was limited by the sensor inside vs my needs - and then went to a 7DII because I knew of all the factors, I really wanted to put that AF point where I wanted it, and not be limited by the old 9 point af. But before I upgraded the body, I had a good collection of L lenses, that do everything I could push a lens to do first - you don't have to have L lenses to take great pictures, but a complete understanding of what your camera /lens system can and can't do will let you know where to upgrade next.

I also spent a lot of time learning off camera flash and shaping light before the upgrade as well. So think about what you need, and what your camera can do, and then go from there.

Some awesome street photographers have had one lens, one camera body for 20+ years... so worry about your needs, and if the tools you have fit them.

 

[m8547]

I don't think full frame is worth it unless you know you need it (can't get images you want with your current gear) or unless you have plenty of money to spare.

I've had a T3i, 18-55 IS II, and 55-250 IS since 2012, and in the last year I've taken some incredible photos with them. I'm consistently amazed by how good the RAW files look. On a recent trip I took one photo of a flower that I couldn't improve with Lightroom; it looked best with no develop settings at all! The color is so purple that it's out of gamut for my monitor and the print lab I use. I have some photos from this setup that I think are worthy of printing relatively large and hanging on the wall.

Other lenses I have that I rarely use are: 50mm f/1.8 II, Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, Rokinon 35mm f/1.4

I've been wanting to try full frame for a while, and prices seem good right now and I can afford it. So I just bought a 6D, a 24-70 ii, and a Rokinon 14mm f/2.8. I haven't used them much yet. I'll probably buy a 100-400 ii soon. The two main things I will be able to do better with full frame are night sky photos and better blurred backgrounds (subject-background separation).

There are downsides to full frame. The larger sensor demands heavier, more expensive glass. I'm often hiking or backpacking, and I don't look forward to carrying several times the weight in camera gear. Quality wise, based on my interpretation of The Digital Picture's test charts, the $600 24-105 L has similar performance to the ~$100 18-55 kit lens. Yeah, the 24-105 is slightly better, but it's not six times better. And the 55-250 is similar to the larger more expensive 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. To me it seems like if you want a step up from the EF-S kit lenses in quality you need to spend thousands on full frame zoom lenses. If you simply switch to full frame and get the cheapest full frame zoom lenses, I'm not sure what the point would be.

The 24-70 ii is nice without many flaws in image quality, but I miss having IS, and despite popular opinion it's not a prime killer. Primes still have much wider apertures available, some of them are sharper when stopped down than the 24-70 ii, and some of them have IS. But primes are less convenient of course.

I would recommend sticking with APS-C and upgrading lenses. If prime lenses fit your shooting style those are the best value to improve your photography in my opinion. You don't need L primes, and you can get great performance from less expensive ones like the 35mm f/2 IS, 85mm f/1.8 USM. Some of the third party brands make excellent primes, and Rokinon/Samyang/Bower lenses are an incredible deal if you get a good one and if you don't mind manual focus.

If primes don't work for your style, there are some good third party zooms, too. The Tokina 11-16 is a great lens, though I don't use it very much because it's hard to take good wide angle shots. And I've heard good things about the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 which is will get you full frame look and outstanding image quality on a crop sensor.

Even the cheap primes are not bad. I was going through my photos the other day, and I came across some nice photos taken with the 50mm f/1.8. Sure they probably aren't great if I zoom in and study the pixels (but I didn't do that), and the contrast could have been slightly better if I had a better quality lens, but they are not bad. I should use that lens more often.

You could consider upgrading your camera body if yours doesn't meet your needs in some way, such as not fast enough continuous shooting, or not a big enough viewfider (the 60D and 70D have larger, brighter pentaprism viewfinders, but I'm not sure if that's worth upgrading for). Some of the best features of the 6D relative to my T3i are the locking mode dial, larger buffer for RAW burst shooting (16 shots at 4.5 fps instead of 7 shots at 3.7fps), more buttons for faster adjustment, etc. All of those things are available in crop sensor bodies, too.

My APS-C kit cost about $1100 for a body and zoom lenses covering 11-250mm.

A full frame setup will be over $5000 to cover about the same equivalent range with significantly better image quality. But my images won't be 5x better, and there was nothing really wrong with my images before. I'm still not sure that I made the right choice.

I'm considering getting some more primes to go with my 6D (a 35mm with autofocus, 85mm, and maybe something longer. Or maybe I'll upgrade the 50mm f/1.8 to something that's worth using frequently), but I'm hesitant to give up the zoom lenses because they are so convenient sometimes. As a result I'll probably spend even more on lenses.

I do all kinds of photography. I like anything natural, so I've done a lot of landscapes and wildflowers recently. I like wildlife when it's convenient, so I need a good super telephoto. I'll do portraits when people want them. And I like to bring a camera with me when I hike or go on vacation for snapshots and in case I come across a good photo opportunity.

 

[Haydn1971]

Personally, if you are generally happy shooting with the 1100D, keep it and invest in glass that you will keep for many years after you ditch the camera that you ultimately replace the 1100D with.

If you have an itch to go full frame, consider some second hand primes - great value can be had in the local camera shops and often these come with 12 month warrenty too. You've a 50mm prime, how do you feel about the AF as its notoriously annoying to some. You could probably find a 2xmm prime and say the 85mm prime for your upgrade budget.

Alternatively, I really enjoy playing around with my Lensbaby system of lenses - I've a basic body, a selection of 50mm optics, macro lenses, different aparture plates, 0.6x & 1.6x screw in lenses, a fisheye and the Sweet 35... Loads of creative fun that migrated with me from my previous 450D to my 6D - it's all manual focus though, so if you don't like to fiddle, don't consider.

Whilst loads of people will talk camera upgrades, don't get caught up in the trap - an 1100D shorting in RAW processed via Lightroom will give you studio quality output - a better camera just makes your life easier.

 

[luigigo]

RAW image quality of stills is similar with T3, 60D and 70D. FF of 5DII has better sharpness and high ISO performance.

 

[Dugways]

I would say that I'm probably looking for a bigger view finder, more dynamic range, more buttons for faster adjustments, better low light and an external mic jack. Looking into it some more, it looks like the 7D would be a good choice for all of those. Anything I should be aware of about it? or any other cameras to consider? I've been looking into sony a bit and their better dynamic range is pretty tempting

 

[Kristofgss]

I would say that I'm probably looking for a bigger view finder, more dynamic range, more buttons for faster adjustments, better low light and an external mic jack. Looking into it some more, it looks like the 7D would be a good choice for all of those. Anything I should be aware of about it? or any other cameras to consider? I've been looking into sony a bit and their better dynamic range is pretty tempting

I have the 7D and it's built like atank, has taken lots of abuse and still works perfectly. You won't get more dynamic range with it though, it's advantage are higher FPS, better weather sealing, better autofocus and 100% viewfinder.

 

[TheJock]

I have a 70D and must admit that as an iPhone/Facebook junkie the articulated touch screen really is my favourite part about the camera. It takes a damn good image too, I’ve been really surprised with the high ISO performance on occasions!
All the best with your decision.

 

[NancyP]

If you are interested in video, you might go for the 70D and get the STM equivalent to your existing lens (or the newer 18-135 STM).

If you are primarily interested in still photography, don't mind manual focus, and have access to some old manual focus, manual aperture ring Nikon or M42 mount (or some other mounts) lenses from a relative, you could get a used 6D (USD $850.00 to $1,100.00), Eg-S focusing screen (USD $38.00 new), and adapter ring(s) (USD $5.00 to $70.00 new, depending on mount type). I am using a bunch of inherited old lenses this way - mostly AIS Nikkors.

Or - don't change a thing. How's your computer? Get one or more really good processing programs - I know Adobe gives student rates.

 

[photon]

Have you ever shot with a FF and compared it with images you are used to seeing on your equipment?

I have shot with a 60D for a few years. I have rented lenses and used the following on it:

Canon:
35L
100L IS Macro
135L
100-400 mkI
18-135 IS
10-22mm
17-55 IS
24mm 2.8
35f2 MkI
70-300mm IS

Sigma:
30 1.4 Art
35 1.4 Art
8-16mm
18-35 1.8
24 1.4

Tamron:
70-300 Di VC

Then one stupid day I rented a 6D...

I haven't shot a lot on the 60D since.

I then shot a friends 5D Mk II.

I just want to own a FF.

These are just my experiences, but for someone who just loves taking pictures of everything from friends, to weddings, to wildlife, I would still take all the compromises in AF (yes even for BIF's, with a little practice, a little patience, and more time learning the animals I had a great time even with the 60D's AF system), to own the full frame.

I am taking my 60D to my first Burning Man this year with almost the hope that it doesn't survive so I have to replace it with a FF.

 

[Jeff]

I completely agree, the size difference really does separate the 5dM2 from your APS-C choices, except Nancy point about video / focus feature / and DOF due to the small sensor. However a couple of other thoughts about the 5dM2, first because it is a better built camera I would be much more comfortable about buying it used verses a lesser model. In fact I personally would not recommend buying a used model such as the 60-D.

I really hope Canon drops the APS-C size cameras. I feel they are overburden trying to fill all these different gaps. And have painfully dropped the ball on some needed updates, (28-135 & 40tse, there's more relevant ones these are just my personal wish list). Back in the 80s we had 110 film it lasted for a bit but was soon replaced with the full frame 35mm point n shoot (that pocket Olympus was so cool) And if Sony's new mirrorless camera say anything it's that they are going to push the "full frame" feature as a marketing leverage with interchangeable lens cameras from whatever build style. I bring this up because gear is an investment that can & should last many years, it might be wise to look to the future with full frame gear.

Finally I've been playing with my 5dM2 these past couple of weeks and that camera is still awesome, solid and capable as ever. With Magic Lantern I would almost say it surpasses my 6D (except high ISO ability) I also feel you will find it used for many years if you ever need to keep any continuity with your gear.

On additional thought, for personal work I love limiting my camera bag to one maybe two lenses it really frees me from equipment back to making pictures, so don't think having only a 50 is a downgrade good chance it'll upgrade your seeing. Nice work by the way.

 

[unfocused]

I own a 5DIII, 7D I and 70D. Buy a 70D and 18-135mm stm lens. They are incredibly cheap right now. The 70D will give you everything that the original 7D offered plus lots of video features, a better sensor, dual pixel autofocus, touch screen and swivel screen.

Full frame is nice but the incremental improvements cost a lot. A 6D and 24-105 zoom will set you back more than double the 70D and won't be nearly as versatile. Don't buy old tech, which is what you'd be doing with a 5D II or 7D I.

 

[Dugways]

How is the continuous video auto focus on the 70D? Is it anything like the T4i, because I found that the T4i's continuous video auto focus was kind of bad, throwing it out of focus when the shot was already in focus, only to focus back in a few seconds later. Plus, I wasn't a huge fan of the touch screen, seemed kind of gimmicky

 

[FTb-n]

I'm hooked on FF and love the color depth, high ISO, wider range of DOF, and sharper images. I would look closely at the 5D2 vs. the 7D or the 70D. Consider the Canon refurb store for better pricing on new or nearly new gear.

Ultimately, this boils down to subject matter, desired features, and, as KSGAL asked, how your current camera is holding you back. The 5D2 will give you better image quality across the board. Cheaper lenses like the 40 f2.8 STM, the new 50 1.8 STM, and the 85 f1.8 will be great with this body and give you incredible control of DOF.

But, you need to capture the image before you can do anything with it. If action shots are important, then I'd consider a 7D. If action and video are important, then the 70D.

If your subjects are less active, I'd suggest the 5D2. The 5D2 may come up short for sports, but has been a staple among pros for weddings and landscapes. Based on the photos that you posted, this might be right up your alley.

 

[unfocused]

How is the continuous video auto focus on the 70D? Is it anything like the T4i, because I found that the T4i's continuous video auto focus was kind of bad, throwing it out of focus when the shot was already in focus, only to focus back in a few seconds later. Plus, I wasn't a huge fan of the touch screen, seemed kind of gimmicky

Movie mode autofocus on any DSLR is not going to be great in my opinion, but the 70D is the best Canon I am aware of (have not tried the 7DII. It may be better). I am a big advocate of touch screens -- it makes sorting through the menu much easier and quicker and you don't have to use it if you don't like it. For video, the ability to change/adjust focus by touching the screen is very handy.

 

[CreationHeart]

So I've been running with a EOS T3 (without the i. Other wise know as the 1100D) for about two years now and I finally have some cash to invest in some upgrades. My problem is that I cant choose between the 60D, 70D and 5DII. I would probably be buying these used and I'm not sure if I should spring the extra money for the 5DII. I'm a 17 year old amateur with a summer job wanting to upgrade before I go off to university, so whatever I choose will have to last a few years. I also really dont have much in the way of glass, just the kit 18-55mm and F1.8 50mm but deciding on a new lens kind of depends on what body I decide to go with. My sweet spot for a price would probably be in the 700-800 range, but if the 5D is really worth it, I could stretch for it (Well, more like double for it). So I'm curious for your opinions on the matter, do I get the 5D and shoot with my nifty fifty until I can get a good lens, do I get the 60D and some nice glass, or grab the 70D and stick with my kit lens for a while?
I've attached some of my photos to give you guys kind of a sense of what I like to shoot

Hi,
FF all the way and you won't regret it. Looking at your photos you seem to shoot slow, and you seem to like DOF. With FF such as EOS 5D you will enjoy those look that you want. Definitely FF if you want that look and there's no compromise there.

My advice would be to get a second hand 5D2 there should be plenty around on the market and they are super cheap. Then get a 50mm 1.8 or even 1.4 then enjoy your photography. It will last you.

If budget is too much of a strech, just keep your current body as anything else like 60,70D won't help your improve your photography. They just have slightly better IQ (less noise and a few MP difference and perhaps much better handling.

Regards
F

 

[Arty]

I would pick up a 60D and some nice primes. Normally, I would recommend glass first. The 60D has good AF, the size is moderate, and the controls are nice. The price is great right now. Once you can swing it, get some fast glass. I loved the 35F2 on my 6D and like the newer, more expensive IS version even more. A 50 is a short telephoto on crop, so a wider prime makes sense for general use.
I shoot both crop and full frame. Full frame is going to cost and you will need to buy almost all new glass. I would learn what you can do with a decent crop body before going that route. If you think you will eventually go full frame, then avoid crop glass.
You have plenty of time to run up charge debt. You can do what you want, for now, with a decent crop camera and quality glass. With primes, quality glass need not cost a bundle.

 

[hawaiisunsetphoto]

So I've been running with a EOS T3 (without the i. Other wise know as the 1100D) for about two years now and I finally have some cash to invest in some upgrades. My problem is that I cant choose between the 60D, 70D and 5DII. I would probably be buying these used and I'm not sure if I should spring the extra money for the 5DII. I'm a 17 year old amateur with a summer job wanting to upgrade before I go off to university, so whatever I choose will have to last a few years. I also really dont have much in the way of glass, just the kit 18-55mm and F1.8 50mm but deciding on a new lens kind of depends on what body I decide to go with. My sweet spot for a price would probably be in the 700-800 range, but if the 5D is really worth it, I could stretch for it (Well, more like double for it). So I'm curious for your opinions on the matter, do I get the 5D and shoot with my nifty fifty until I can get a good lens, do I get the 60D and some nice glass, or grab the 70D and stick with my kit lens for a while?
I've attached some of my photos to give you guys kind of a sense of what I like to shoot

Hi,
FF all the way and you won't regret it. Looking at your photos you seem to shoot slow, and you seem to like DOF. With FF such as EOS 5D you will enjoy those look that you want. Definitely FF if you want that look and there's no compromise there.

My advice would be to get a second hand 5D2 there should be plenty around on the market and they are super cheap. Then get a 50mm 1.8 or even 1.4 then enjoy your photography. It will last you.

If budget is too much of a strech, just keep your current body as anything else like 60,70D won't help your improve your photography. They just have slightly better IQ (less noise and a few MP difference and perhaps much better handling.

Regards
F

Yes, given your style and budget right now, get a 5D Mark II. A friend of mine was in exactly your position. They got a 5D Mark II and haven't looked back.