Time For An Upgrade - 6D or 7D?

Hey all,

I've come here many times for help with camera decisions and what not, so I hope you all can help me again!

The 400D I've been using for the past couple of years finally needs to be replaced. Not because it doesn't work, but just because I feel it's outdated and I'd like to have a new toy.

I've been looking at the 6D and 7D cameras, which both appeal to me, but I'm just not sure which one I should go with.

I like the 7D due to the crop sensor because I do like to shoot wildlife a fair amount of times, and that can help me get closer. I also like the 19 focus points and 8FPS shooting mode.

Then again, I also like the 6D for the newer processor, the ability to shoot in lower light situations with less noise pickup, and the ability to shoot with better quality video.

I've read the reviews, looked them over more and more, and I'm just not sure which one to get. Can anyone give me some extra input or information that might sell me on one of the cameras over the other? Or just somethings that might have helped sell you on one over the other?

Thanks!

The "reach" difference is not small and trying to make up for it with longer lenses is going to cost you dearly.

How's the lighting when you're shooting wildlife? That's one of the big differences between the two -- and do you need the reach?

If you need the reach there's no contest. If you need the high-performance AF there is also no contest. If your primary issue is low-light (e.g. high-ISO) performance then the scale instantly goes the other way.

Lighting is usually good unless Ive been out too long and the sun begins to set, or if in the woods where it's shady. I suppose I would need the reach more than I believe I would, especially when I move to California (I plan to be at Yosemite a lot, but even then I still might need to buy a longer distance lens).

I suppose you might have just answered my question for me with the AF and reach vs. ISO. For low light situations, which would be more for cars and what not, I could always use the tripod.

If there is anything else to point out, please do so.

Go with what you're primary needs are. Go with the 7D.

Should the 70D be something worth considering in this as well?

Maybe if WiFi is important to you. Honestly I was in the same shoes as your are in. I heavily debated between the 6D, 7D, and 70D. I went with the 6D based on my needs and interest into a FF camera. If I need the reach I could get a TC 2X III and I do not do wildlife photos.

Yeah that doesn't interest me and it sounds like it's more for video than photo. Is that correct?

HailttRedskins wrote in post #16405994
Yeah that doesn't interest me and it sounds like it's more for video than photo. Is that correct?

Yeah from what I researched.

Okay thanks. I guess I'll stick with the 7D for now because of the wildlife. Hopefully as people come home from work I'll get more responses.

Thanks so far everyone.

I own the 6D, 7D, and 70D. AND I am also a wildlife photographer (and some portraits, engagements, real estate... whatever pays the bill.)

Out of these 3, I'd recommend the 7D, that is the best bang for the buck for someone who does a lot of wildlife shooting.

The 7D was my main wildlife camera for 3 years, and I've just switched to the 70D, which has some advantages, and some disadvantages too. Overall I like the 70D for my style of shooting a bit better than the 7D.
However, the 7D is much cheaper on the used market right now, and almost as good IQ as the 70D. The 70D produces a little more detail (with a good lens), and handles noise better at the higher ISOs. Not many tests mention this but I much prefer the nature and grain of the 70D's noise to the 7D's. The 70D is much more uniform and mostly free of ugly specks and dots that the 7D has at higher ISOs in the shadows.

The 6D is a phenomenal camera, especially for the money. I do use it for wildlife occasionally, especially when I'm shooting something interesting and the Sun is about to set. When it gets darker and I still want to keep shooting, I often switch to the 6D and take the "reach" penalty in favor of less noise. But my 6D gets most use at portrait sessions, landscapes and events (especially low-light events).

So overall I'd say 7D on the budget. Great AF, good IQ, good reach, robust build, good ergonomics, good buffer for continuous shooting.

HailttRedskins wrote in post #16406048
Okay thanks. I guess I'll stick with the 7D for now because of the wildlife. Hopefully as people come home from work I'll get more responses.

Thanks so far everyone.

Good choice.
Check out my Flickr page in my signature. Most of the shots there were taken with my 7D.

Thanks and I'll give you a follow

Have to realize, too, that the 7D will have better low light performance than your existing camera. AND you can always buy a faster lens in the future if you need it and still maintain the reach. I think that would be cheaper than buying really long lenses for use with the 6D.

Yeah I knew I'd be better in low light with the 7D compared to the 400D. Just wanted to make sure there wouldn't be a huge drop.

7D sounds like a great upgrade for you as a wildlife shooter, just be aware that it might be worth it cost savings wise to find a good deal on a factory refurbished 7D. That way if you decide to jump on the 7D Mark II (if it finally comes out next year?), you won't face too much depreciation on the price if you decide to sell your 7D. The 6D and its full frame sensor sure is lucrative, but as a wildlife shooter its not necessarily the best choice of body in terms of AF flexibility and responsiveness / FPS.