Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 12 Apr 2013 (Friday) 04:18
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Will the quality be noticeable with 6D over T5i

 
ed ­ rader
"I am not the final word"
Avatar
23,160 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 467
Joined May 2005
Location: silicon valley
     
Apr 13, 2013 17:32 |  #16

mlech wrote in post #15818862 (external link)
Shooting with my T3i I'm satisified with the quality is produces, only thing holding me back is my lens. I can switch over to the T5i for the extra bit of features it has + it being new, and get a couple or few nice lenses and I'd be happy.

With the 6D there is only one lens that is suiteable for my liking. With Image Stabilization, constant aperature of F/2.8, with a bit of zoom.. that is the Tamrom 24-70. With this lens + body combo I'm already looking at about $3k. Also keeping in mind I do shoot videos so the IS is helpful.

For day time shooting a nice lens + T5i I know will get what I want. The only thing is lower light.

The only reason I'd really be buying the 6D for is because of the better low light ISO performance. Which is still a pretty big reason but just not sure if it's worth it. I can always get a lens with a wider aperature to compensate for the not as good ISO performance on T5i = shooting in lower ISO. whenever shooting in lower light.

Looking for some thoughts on this.
90% of my shooting is planned so I can always adjust, I'm just not sure how much better the 6D ISO performance is. If it is amazing, then I will have to consider the 6D in that case.. but then it limits me to 1 lens with my budget (for the time being), which is still ok with me. I also have a spare 50mm II

that's a huge reason for me and totally worth it. I recently upgraded from the 1ds mark III to the 5d mark III. night and day difference and alone worth the upgrade.


http://instagram.com/e​draderphotography/ (external link)
5D4, 80d, 16-35L F4 IS, 24-70L II, 70-200L F4 IS II, 100-400L II, sigma 15 FE, sigma 14 f1.8 art, tc 1.4 III, 430exII, gitzo 3542L + markins Q20, gitzo GT 1545T + markins Q3T, gitzo GM4562

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
mlech
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
305 posts
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Apr 13, 2013 21:15 as a reply to  @ post 15824347 |  #17

Where online can I get a deal on the 6D / 24-105mm lens kit?

The best deal for 6D body I've been able to find is $1649.00 on ebay.


Unless I'm able to get some kind of deal on the 24-105 in a kit, I don't see me buying it. I'd rather spend a bit more for the Tamron 24-70


FACEBOOK PAGE (external link)
FLICKR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TTuna ­ Eye
Member
202 posts
Likes: 31
Joined May 2011
Location: Suburban Minneapolis
     
Apr 13, 2013 22:25 |  #18

According to Canonrumors there will be new rebates next week so wait a day or two and look again. I's sure B&H and Adorama along with others will have prices reflecting that.


6D, 60D, 100L, 24-105L, Sig 150-500, nifty 50, EF-S 60mm, Tam SP70-200 f/2.8 Di VC, Underwater gear T2i in a Watershot housing with Inon S2000 strobes.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,671 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 3963
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Apr 14, 2013 01:31 |  #19

JVthePT wrote in post #15823480 (external link)
My 6d even makes my el-crappo 28-135mm rattle trap lens look sharp and that's saying something! ;-)a

This.

Seriously, people preaching that FF requires L glass are mostly just passing on what they've read. Since going FF my favorite lenses have been vintage primes... the most expensive of which cost me a whopping $40 ;)

Of course L lenses will give you the best of everything, but that's true on any body. I got the 24-105L with my 6D and I barely use it, but it is fantastic for video which is primarily why I hold onto it.

FF opens a lot more doors than just higher ISO ability. In my opinion it's how shooting an SLR is meant to be. You get many more options for fast, wide primes, better DOF control, sharper images, etc. One of the biggest things for me is that my lenses are actually the focal length listed on the lens and I don't have to multiply it by 1.6 ;)


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-H1 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)www.LucasGPhoto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,229 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2748
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Apr 14, 2013 02:17 |  #20

considering you only shoot cars it looks like...i think a tripod would do you better if you're shooting low light...especially since the majority of your shots the car is parked...

if i were in your shoes shooting cars...i'd invest in one of those boom rigs, or whatever they are that allow you to get rolling shots


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Apr 14, 2013 04:11 |  #21

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #15825523 (external link)
This.

Seriously, people preaching that FF requires L glass are mostly just passing on what they've read. Since going FF my favorite lenses have been vintage primes... the most expensive of which cost me a whopping $40 ;)

The ironic thing is that it's crop cameras that need better lenses, because the pixel density requires more resolving power. Full frame makes all lenses look better.
If there was a full frame sensor with the same pixel density as the 18MP crop sensor, it would be around 44MP! And a crop sensor with the pixel density of the 6D, would only be 8MP. That really shows how much more resolution current crop sensors demands from a lens.

FF opens a lot more doors than just higher ISO ability. In my opinion it's how shooting an SLR is meant to be. You get many more options for fast, wide primes, better DOF control, sharper images, etc. One of the biggest things for me is that my lenses are actually the focal length listed on the lens and I don't have to multiply it by 1.6 ;)

Not having to multiply by 1.6 to work out the minimum shutter speed before shake impacts the sharpness, is nice.


Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,980 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 18
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
Apr 14, 2013 17:16 |  #22

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #15825523 (external link)
This.

Seriously, people preaching that FF requires L glass are mostly just passing on what they've read. Since going FF my favorite lenses have been vintage primes... the most expensive of which cost me a whopping $40 ;)

Of course L lenses will give you the best of everything, but that's true on any body. I got the 24-105L with my 6D and I barely use it, but it is fantastic for video which is primarily why I hold onto it.

FF opens a lot more doors than just higher ISO ability. In my opinion it's how shooting an SLR is meant to be. You get many more options for fast, wide primes, better DOF control, sharper images, etc. One of the biggest things for me is that my lenses are actually the focal length listed on the lens and I don't have to multiply it by 1.6 ;)

I've been shooting both fullframe and croppers since 2008, and I am sorry but the 28-135 is a mediocre lens. It is fine on a cropper, but the corners are not very good on a full frame. And yes, I did own one for a while and it was OK.

The tamron 28-75 I owned was also good on a crop, but to get good performance in the corners on full frame you DO have to spend more over a crop lens to get like results. This is based on the experience of roughly 150k fullframe clicks over the last 5 years. If you'd like you can call me an L snob, but I don't think so. I really liked the tammy 17-50, and love 85/1.8 and 100 macro, and former 17-55IS. The tammy 24-70VC looks like a great lens, but it is considerably more expensive than its crop cousins


Current: 5DM3, 6D, 8mm fish, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 85/1.8, 100-400/IS v1, lensbaby composer with edge 80, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 80D, 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70/2.8, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/4IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyKPhoto
Goldmember
1,633 posts
Likes: 46
Joined Apr 2012
     
Apr 14, 2013 17:21 |  #23

I received my MK III the other day. The low light performance is amazing. With my 24-105l f/4 I am getting usable indoor images at night using ISO 16,000. Well worth it.

If you are looking at a 6D, just be aware that it only has 1 cross type af point. It's not like most of the crop cameras that have 9 cross type.


5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mornnb
Goldmember
1,646 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 23
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Apr 14, 2013 23:42 |  #24

timbop wrote in post #15827580 (external link)
I've been shooting both fullframe and croppers since 2008, and I am sorry but the 28-135 is a mediocre lens. It is fine on a cropper, but the corners are not very good on a full frame. And yes, I did own one for a while and it was OK.

All he's saying is that the 28-135mm looks much better on a full frame than a crop, because the full frame sensor is able to get a sharper image from this lens. He wasn't saying it was a good lens, just that's its not as bad on full frame as it is on crop. Centre sharpness matters more than corner sharpness, and this lens limited resolving powers means it produces better results on full frame.


Canon 5D Mark III - Leica M240
EF 16-35mm F/4 IS L - EF 14mm f/2.8 L II - - EF 17mm TS-E L - EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II - EF 70-200mm IS II f/2.8 L - Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art - Sigma 85mm f/1.4 EX
Voigtlander 15mm III - 28mm Elmarit-M ASPH - 35mm f/1.4 Summilux-M FLE - 50mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
automag928
Member
240 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Tampa
     
Apr 15, 2013 07:52 |  #25

mlech wrote in post #15824262 (external link)
Screw it 6D it is! thanks for the replies,
I'll be ordering one soon.

I do want the 24-105L, but not sure how the F4 will do for low light video shooting, for pictures
I guess I could always rent one and see how I like it.

I'd be happy with the Tamron 24-70 but I heard split reviews on them, especially being soft?

Coming from someone who just got a 6D on Saturday, and was really concerned with the f4 in low light (my 7D lenses were all 2.8 or better) all I did was bump up the ISO...Amazing. I cant wait to throw on my 50 1.8 and play around.


Canon 5D4 | Canon 6D | Canon 24-70 f2.8 L II | Canon 70-200 f2.8 L II | Canon 24-105 f4 L | Canon 70-300 L | Canon 85 f1.8 | Canon 50 f1.8 | 430EXIII

Gear / Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eksine
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Post edited over 4 years ago by eksine.
     
Nov 22, 2015 02:31 as a reply to  @ post 15818940 |  #26

the guy saying the 5d mark1 wasn't a high iso camera is wrong its top feature when it came out was for low light performance. But I don't agree with you saying for him to get a 5D, the dust problem is too annoying, the camera is about 10 years old, it's no longer a good option when you can get a 6d used for $900-1000 on ebay. I think I bought a used 5d for $1500 or something like that back then. also I used a $100 50mm f1.8 plastic lens for weddings so poop to your expensive lens theory.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eksine
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Post edited over 4 years ago by eksine.
     
Nov 22, 2015 02:37 as a reply to  @ post 15819073 |  #27

you're not really right on that saying full frame cost more than just lens, depending if you're buying a lot of strobes and accessories, but really what you're talking about is lens so that's a definitely no. the canon 50mm and 40mm STM EF lenses are literally $125 and $150 each , they work more than fine as your only lens for a while, or forever. you can get away with using no zooms

since you replied to that on 2013, not sure when these STM lens came out but I was using a 5d and only the 50mm 1.8 version ii and I didn't have too much problem with this lens, it was $100 for this lens




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,298 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 1801
Joined Dec 2006
     
Nov 22, 2015 04:10 |  #28

eksine wrote in post #17792365 (external link)
you're not really right on that saying full frame cost more than just lens, depending if you're buying a lot of strobes and accessories, but really what you're talking about is lens so that's a definitely no. the canon 50mm and 40mm STM EF lenses are literally $125 and $150 each , they work more than fine as your only lens for a while, or forever. you can get away with using no zooms

since you replied to that on 2013, not sure when these STM lens came out but I was using a 5d and only the 50mm 1.8 version ii and I didn't have too much problem with this lens, it was $100 for this lens

You probably aren't helping by dredging up old threads to reply to. We call those zombie threads. There are plenty of current threads to reply to.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

12,045 views & 1 like for this thread
Will the quality be noticeable with 6D over T5i
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Kylemorgan
1137 guests, 256 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.