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 25 Nov 2013 (Monday) 09:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7D vs 6d for bird photography

 
monkey44
Senior Member
Avatar
726 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 25, 2013 19:58 |  #16

I keep reading statements (a ew) that say "If you don't know the reason for buying a FF camera, you don't need one.

So, in this case we have a FF vs CF inherent in this answer - so, maybe those folks who own the FF 6D will explain why they have it.

We know the 'reach' on the CF appears longer when shooting conditions are the same. So, why would one buy/use the 6D at all. Does it change between 'small birds' (reach) and FF frame for a portrait or mountain scene, for example. Or, did I just answer my own question?? Not sure, haven't shot with either one, but am contemplating one or the other soon.

Don't want to hijack this thread, but that answer seems relevant to the OP question too.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jhayesvw
Cream of the Crop
7,230 posts
Gallery: 167 photos
Likes: 270
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Tucson AZ
     
Nov 25, 2013 20:12 |  #17

Full frame generally gives better imag quality and less post processing when
you are not focal length limited. Like landscape and portraits are slightly better in general on a FF.

If you can't get close and need to crop your photo substantially the crop bodies generally do slightly better than FF.
Again it comes down to the photographer and lenses though.



My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MakisM1
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,653 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 385
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Nov 25, 2013 20:24 |  #18

monkey44 wrote in post #16480002 (external link)
I keep reading statements (a ew) that say "If you don't know the reason for buying a FF camera, you don't need one.

So, in this case we have a FF vs CF inherent in this answer - so, maybe those folks who own the FF 6D will explain why they have it.

We know the 'reach' on the CF appears longer when shooting conditions are the same. So, why would one buy/use the 6D at all. Does it change between 'small birds' (reach) and FF frame for a portrait or mountain scene, for example. Or, did I just answer my own question?? Not sure, haven't shot with either one, but am contemplating one or the other soon.

Don't want to hijack this thread, but that answer seems relevant to the OP question too.

For the same lens, FF gives you approximately 1.6x more sharpness. If you are a landscaper, probably you can appreciate the extra sharpness/detail


Gerry
Canon 5D MkIII/Canon 60D/Canon EF-S 18-200/Canon EF 24-70L USM II/Canon EF 70-200L 2.8 USM II/Canon EF 50 f1.8 II/Σ 8-16/ 430 EXII
OS: Linux Ubuntu/PostProcessing: Darktable/Image Processing: GIMP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mahgnillig
Member
Avatar
206 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2011
Location: Carson City, NV
     
Nov 25, 2013 20:48 |  #19

My guess is that most people who buy a 6D don't buy it with the intention of using it for a lot of wildlife or bird shots... instead they would be buying it for the wonderful portrait and landscape image quality. I'd be interested in seeing if anyone actually did buy a 6D primarily for wildlife, but I think that number would be pretty low since if you're shooting wildlife with a FF you'd need some very expensive glass to go with it, and if you can afford that kind of glass then you can probably also afford more camera than the 6D.

I was also contemplating one or the other (6D or 7D) and quickly realised that for what I like to shoot I should probably get both!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
3,735 posts
Likes: 738
Joined Jan 2010
     
Nov 25, 2013 21:05 |  #20

amfoto1 wrote in post #16478614 (external link)
Be patient... I bet we see a 7D Mark II sometime next year. I expect that will be a great birders' camera.

It had better have high-ISO read noise as good or better than current Sony and Toshiba sensors, or I am going to be very upset. Canon has not made any significant improvements in APS-C high-ISO read noise since the 7D.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Nov 25, 2013 21:08 |  #21
bannedPermanent ban

John Sheehy wrote in post #16480173 (external link)
It had better have high-ISO read noise as good or better than current Sony and Toshiba sensors, or I am going to be very upset. Canon has not made any significant improvements in APS-C high-ISO read noise since the 7D.

Well prepare to be upset.

It will 99.99% use the same sensor as in the 70D imo...


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John ­ Sheehy
Goldmember
3,735 posts
Likes: 738
Joined Jan 2010
     
Nov 25, 2013 21:39 |  #22

monkey44 wrote in post #16480002 (external link)
We know the 'reach' on the CF appears longer when shooting conditions are the same. So, why would one buy/use the 6D at all. Does it change between 'small birds' (reach) and FF frame for a portrait or mountain scene, for example. Or, did I just answer my own question?? Not sure, haven't shot with either one, but am contemplating one or the other soon.

I am an outlier here; I use my 6D for most bird shooting, and the 7D stays home most of the time. The only time I choose the 7D is when I know that I will be shooting birds in bright sun, or really need the better AIServo or burst speed. The 6D with 1.4x of quality TC magnification has less detail loss due to the TC than the 7D's much stronger AA filter does, and a lot less high-ISO noise, even with the doubled ISO. I am unusual, of course, in the fact that I manually focus most of the time, as I can't tolerate hunting and cameras refusing to take a shot when the subject is clearly in focus. For someone with more reliance on AF, the higher potential subject quality of the 6D with TC may, of course, not be realized in practice.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
M_Six
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,550 posts
Gallery: 59 photos
Likes: 1367
Joined Dec 2010
Location: East Central IL
     
Nov 25, 2013 22:13 |  #23

I shoot with both and usually opt for the 6D when I bring along the 1.4x TC (which is quite often). I've found the 6D will focus more accurately and faster when using the 1.4x TC (either my Kenko or the Canon 1.4x TC III with taped pins). The 7D hunts like crazy with the Kenko TC before finally focusing and it won't focus at all with the Canon TC with pins taped. Also, with either camera using the 400 5.6 and 1.4x TC, you're at f8. Keeping a decent shutter speed for a moving bird (~1/1250s) at f8 usually requires high ISO. That's when the 6D outperforms the 7D once you start cropping down.

If there is decent light and I'm using the 400 5.6 without the 1.4x TC, then the 7D comes into its own, if I need the reach.

I shot an airshow last year with the 7D and this year with the 6D. Both worked well. Hard to say which was better because the light conditions were quite different as was my lens of choice for the day.

I recently tried the 5D MkIII with the 400 5.6 and Canon 1.4x TC III. Far superior in performance and results to either the 6D or 7D with that combo. No need to tape pins for one thing.


Mark J.
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
monkey44
Senior Member
Avatar
726 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Jul 2003
     
Nov 25, 2013 22:50 |  #24

So, my budget called out for the 6D or the 7D - and I don't care about FF CF as I've shot with both for long enough...

I do a combination of wildlife and scenic - but my true love it the wildlife hard to get and moving - like a ten point Mule Deer Buck jumping a stream instead of simply grazing.

But, the discussion between these two cameras pushes me more toward the 5D M 111 ... as it will do both well, and the FF doesn't bother me - The 100-400 will take care of that pretty well and it can handle a 1.4ext too. And if I pair that with a new 24-105 IS L, and keep my 20-35 for wide, should end up with a nice bag.

Lots of folks choose two cameras - and then lenses that interchange ... but I like one, and travel around too much in the 'bush' to begin adding more weight ... and changing cameras on the fly is bothersome too ... so - maybe hit on a different answer than the 6D - 7D I began asking about.

Wallet will sure take a hit though ... :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
l89kip
Senior Member
584 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Jan 2010
     
Nov 25, 2013 23:25 |  #25

The extra 1.6 reach of crops is surely missed. My 70-200 f/4 on my T1i has great reach. Now with 6D, it's only 200mm, no more :(


Gear: 7D II, 6D | EF-S 17-55 | 35/2, 85/1.8, 35 L,100L,135L, 24-70L II, 24-105L, 70-200 F/4L IS, Sigma 150-600 C | 580 EX II, 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,269 posts
Gallery: 83 photos
Likes: 364
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Nov 26, 2013 07:35 |  #26

gabebalazs wrote in post #16478577 (external link)
I have both plus a 70D. For birds, keep the 7D. Reach and AF are the reasons. I do shoot birds occasionally with my 6D, and shot a whole air show with it too with great results. Yes, IQ is better from the 6D but even that IQ difference can't make up for the 1.6x advantage the 7D has in focal length-limited situations (most bird shooting scenarios are that.) If you shoot the exact same photo with the same 400 5.6L lens, the 7D image will be better than the cropped 6D image.

I have both a 7D and 5D3, and agree with this (and others in this thread) assessment. The additional "pixels on target" that the crop sensor provides will give better results than cropping the full frame image. Since getting the 5D3, my 7D gets used exclusively for wildlife for this reason. The 5D3 gets used for everything else.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
OuttaCtrl
Senior Member
Avatar
381 posts
Joined Oct 2012
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Nov 26, 2013 11:59 |  #27

l89kip wrote in post #16480433 (external link)
The extra 1.6 reach of crops is surely missed. My 70-200 f/4 on my T1i has great reach. Now with 6D, it's only 200mm, no more :(

Why not do a small investment on a 2x TC. Seriously which would you rather have

1) cropped (1.6) on a 200? 1.6 x 200 = 320
or
2) FF (1X) + 2X TC on a 200? 2 x 200 = 400!

Plus since you have a 70-200 f4 the TC 2x II can be bought for less than $250. Only downside is you'd have an f8 but you have a tool that has awesome low-light capabilities to compensate.


Cameras: 5D III Gripped | 1D MK 3 | 70D
Lens: 18-135 STM | 24-70 L MKII | 70-200 L IS MKII
PC: i7-3930K | 32GB Kingston Hyper-X | nVidia Quadro 4000 | Asus P9X79 Pro | 27" Samsung SA monitor | 34" LG 34UM95-P | Spyder 4 Elite

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gabebalazs
Bird Whisperer
Avatar
7,640 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1069
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Toledo, OH
     
Nov 26, 2013 12:37 |  #28

OuttaCtrl wrote in post #16481553 (external link)
Why not do a small investment on a 2x TC. Seriously which would you rather have

1) cropped (1.6) on a 200? 1.6 x 200 = 320
or
2) FF (1X) + 2X TC on a 200? 2 x 200 = 400!

Plus since you have a 70-200 f4 the TC 2x II can be bought for less than $250. Only downside is you'd have an f8 but you have a tool that has awesome low-light capabilities to compensate.

that's true but you need to take into consideration that good, accurate AF is not easy at f/8, plus no lens + 2x TC is very good at wide open, so you need to stop down 1 stop that makes it f/11.

In this specific case, I'd opt for a good crop body (e.g. 7D, 70D) + 1.4x tc an the 200 lens (especially if its an f/4 lens) = 448mm equivalent FoV.


SONY A7RIII | SONY A7III | SONY RX10 IV | SONY RX100 | 24-70 2.8 GM | 70-200 2.8 GM | 16-35 F/4 | PZ 18-105 F/4 | FE 85 1.8 | FE 28-70 | SIGMA 35 1.4 ART | SIGMA 150-600 C | ROKINON 14 2.8
Gabe Balazs Photo (external link)
Nature Shots Portfolio (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nellyle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,228 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 287
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
     
Nov 26, 2013 12:38 |  #29

I've used a 1.4 with a 70-200 f4 and got good results. Not sure I'd want to do the same with a 2x.

Beg, steal or borrow a 1.4 first to see if that gives you what you want.


5D3, 7D2, 1D3, 40D, 14 f2.8 Samyang, 17-40 L, 28-80 L, 70-200 2.8ii L, 200 2.8ii L, 200-400 L, 1.4 ii,
http://chris-stamp.smugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Trench301
Member
145 posts
Likes: 71
Joined Apr 2013
Location: Baltimore, MD
     
Nov 26, 2013 12:56 |  #30

I bought the 6D as an upgrade from rebel xt. 6d is a FANTASTIC camera, but it does struggle with AF tracking fast moving objects. I use the 100-400L with a 2x for birding, but that combo requires manual focusing of everything, which i struggle with, so much so that I often leave the 2x off, just so I can use autofocus (something further away in focus is better than a blurry closeup).

I am anxiously awaiting the release of the 7DII and if the specs and price are decent I may pick one up for birding, airshows, and sports and use the 6D for portraits and scenics, where it ROCKS!

Point is, if you can afford both, get both. Totally different tools for totally different shooting scenarios.


5D3, 6D, 70D, 11-24 f/4L, 16-35 f/4L, 24 TS-E F/3.5L, 24-70 f/2.8L ii, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS ii, 100 f/2.8L Macro, 100-400L, 135 f/2.0L, 200 f/2.8L, 50 f/1.4, 40 f/2.8, 1.4xiii, 2xiii, 430exii
www.trenchardphotograp​hy.com (external link)

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

9,581 views & 0 likes for this thread
7D vs 6d for bird photography
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 ArcticRose
719 guests, 265 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.