5d iii vs 6d for automotive photography

I understand this has been discussed many times but I want to be specific to my need. I'm looking to buy another camera for the following reasons

1. i want to have FF body
   
2. i need another body

• canon 7d
  
• canon 70-200 2.8 IS L
  
• canon 24-70 2.8 L

The 6D is actually better in low light. AFAIK, the biggest consideration in your case might be the AF system. The 6D's AF is pretty low end, while the 5DMKIII has a superb AF system. This will be of no consequence at all for your still shots, but it could make a big difference for races.Never having done that kind of shooting, I don't know how much the AF will matter. Perhaps you could make do with center-point-only on the 6D.

Go 6D and a new wide lens (and bring the 7D when you go to the races).

6d is plenty IMHO. Even old 5dc would do.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #16463434
Go 6D and a new wide lens (and bring the 7D when you go to the races).

^ This. The only advantage of the 5D3 over the 6D in your circumstance is the ergonomics of the 5D3 and 7D are very similar. They also use the same memory type.

If you have the $$$ go with the mark iii. This way you could probably get rid of your 7d and hang on to your lenses.

There's never a reason to go 6D over 5d3 if money isn't a concern unless you care about the increased weight of the 5d3.

That being said, the 6D should be an excellent automotive body. It's only potential hindrances would be the slow FPS for rolling shots and the 1/4000 shutter speed limit if you shoot into the sun at low apertures, which a lot of people do these days for automotive stuff.

VicSkimmr wrote in post #16463921
There's never a reason to go 6D over 5d3 if money isn't a concern unless you care about the increased weight of the 5d3.

That being said, the 6D should be an excellent automotive body. It's only potential hindrances would be the slow FPS for rolling shots and the 1/4000 shutter speed limit if you shoot into the sun at low apertures, which a lot of people do these days for automotive stuff.

f1.4/f2 for cars and needing 1/4000 for rolling shots?

FPS on a 6D is 4.5, which is on the slow side for rolling shots. I should know, I've done it. Rolling shots are nearly always a spray and pray deal unless you're doing them on the highway. More FPS = more keepers.

and yeah, I've been in situations where I hit the shutter limit. f/2.8 with mid morning light.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/jasonwithers/8​669687706/

I don't shoot cars but one can easily stick a ND filter if 1/4000 is an issue.

bobbyz wrote in post #16464506
I don't shoot cars but one can easily stick a ND filter if 1/4000 is an issue.

This.

I shot a car cruise with the 6D and used fast glass for a good portion of it. The lighting conditions were about as awful as you could ever see (Mid-day bright sun, no clouds, 95+ degree heat) which is why I haven't shared bunches of those pics... but the light was intense to the point that even with my lens at f/2 I would've been over 2 stops over-exposed with 1/4000/sec, so the 5D wouldn't have made a difference. Thanks to ND filters it was a non issue.

You'll usually want to use a CPL for shooting cars anyway, in which case you likely won't even need an ND filter.

milleniumking wrote in post #16463915
If you have the $$$ go with the mark iii. This way you could probably get rid of your 7d and hang on to your lenses.

VicSkimmr wrote in post #16463921
There's never a reason to go 6D over 5d3 if money isn't a concern unless you care about the increased weight of the 5d3.

That being said, the 6D should be an excellent automotive body. It's only potential hindrances would be the slow FPS for rolling shots and the 1/4000 shutter speed limit if you shoot into the sun at low apertures, which a lot of people do these days for automotive stuff.

if there is no difference in image quality at good lighting condition i would rather go with 6d and invest more in gears. so my main concern is image quality

VicSkimmr wrote in post #16464499
FPS on a 6D is 4.5, which is on the slow side for rolling shots. I should know, I've done it. Rolling shots are nearly always a spray and pray deal unless you're doing them on the highway. More FPS = more keepers.

and yeah, I've been in situations where I hit the shutter limit. f/2.8 with mid morning light.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/jasonwithers/8​669687706/
Drew's NB Miata by jasonwithers, on Flickr

I still have my 7d for higher FBS.

correct me if i'm wrong but the main advantage in my case to go with 5d iii is AF system and the ability to use it more for motorsport than 6d. The 7d can make up that.

in terms of image quality at conditions for still cars, it will be the same.

i can sell the 7d and get 5d iii instead of 7d+6d, but as mentioned i prefer to have 2 bodies

I'd definitely go for the 6D in your position. It should be decent at the track and if you want something with better AF and higher burst rate, you have the 7D. The 5D III would be to replace your 7D, but since you want 2 bodies; 6D+7D no question.

I would go 5d3, your love of cars could take you to the track and having the af system of the 5d could help out a lot.