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 EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 18 May 2014 (Sunday) 03:50
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Should I upgrade for a 6d + 24-70 f4?

 
Romax12
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
May 18, 2014 03:50 |  #1

hey everyone
my gear is in my signature.
I spotted a somewhat grea deal on a new canon 6d + 24-70 f4 is for about 2600$.
I can probably sell my t3i and the 18-135 for 700$ (prices in my country are not the same).
so basically I need to invest 2000$ +- for a full frame + a decent (?) lens, and then i will cover 24-200.
I don't think I will need the 2.8 aperture on the walk-around lens, though it might come handy.
problem is it cost almost as much as this lens plus the camera body.
my questions are: Will I benefit from moving to a fullframe? and if so, is the 6d enough?
and what do you think about the 24-70 f4? is it equal to the 2.8 in iq etc'?
do you think the transition to all L-glass and a full frame body worth the price of admission?
thanks!


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 159
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
May 18, 2014 04:01 |  #2

What sort of photography do you do?

What limitations, if any, have you found with your current body?

Most amateur photographers would see no real benefit in switching to a so-called "full-frame" format camera. However, there could be a lot of benefit in getting a camera with better controls even if there is no format change.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Romax12
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
May 18, 2014 04:17 |  #3

Well, first of all, i would like a better low-light capabalitties. lets say im indoors, and my 18-135 can shoot at f5.6 (3.5 for less than 20mm...) and I can't pass the 1600 iso range cause I start seeing a lot of noise above that level. my options are lowering shutter speed or using a flash, with the latter not always an option. so a camera which can go as high as 6400 or more would be nice.
fps is also something that I would like. when shooting action I find the 3.7 not enough. af, especially in low light scenerios, is pretty much not an option on my t3i.
other than that, I want a better overall body, like durabllity, features, iq and so on


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jefzor
Senior Member
788 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 24
Joined Jul 2013
     
May 18, 2014 04:35 |  #4

I never understood the point of the 24-70 F4. If low light is what you're after, I don't think F4 is the way to go.


www.jefpauwels.be (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
May 18, 2014 05:08 |  #5

SkipD wrote in post #16912271 (external link)
Most amateur photographers would see no real benefit in switching to a so-called "full-frame" format camera. However, there could be a lot of benefit in getting a camera with better controls even if there is no format change.

I agree with Skip.

Your ISO problems can easily be solved in a cheaper way. You can get a faster lens, an f2.8 lens will let you use 400 or 800 ISO where you had to use 1600 previously. A flash will be even better for when you can use one.

You should be able to shoot at higher than 1600 ISO with your camera, and still get acceptable noise levels. Try improving your post processing, that could save you a lot of money.

That said, the 6D excels at low noise. But I think the 24-70 f4 is a poor choice. You can get the Tamron version which has f2.8, for the same price. Or you can get the 24-105 which has more range and the same aperture, for a much cheaper price.

But you said your main reason to upgrade is low light. An f4 lens is not a low light lens. And f2.8 lenses on full frame are pricey.

What do you take photos of in low light?


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Romax12
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
189 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2012
     
May 18, 2014 05:39 |  #6

umm, i usually take photos of family vacation. indoors are events (birthdays, holidays etc'). I also take action pics of my dogs running and things like that. other then that are portraits and landsacape. im not doing any macro/arcitech and so.
I know I can shoot at 3200 and 6400, but the images start to look very grainy and noisy...


Canon t3i
--- EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 IS --- EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS usm ---
600ex-rt and yn-622c (2x)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ct1co2
Goldmember
Avatar
2,522 posts
Gallery: 63 photos
Likes: 2170
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Denver, CO
     
May 18, 2014 07:43 |  #7

Romax12 wrote in post #16912284 (external link)
fps is also something that I would like. when shooting action I find the 3.7 not enough. af, especially in low light scenerios, is pretty much not an option on my t3i.

I doubt that going from a 3.7fps to 4.5 body is going to make any sort of substantial or noticeable difference. Your lower light limitations below 70mm are more a factor of your glass right now than your camera body. I agree with others there are more effective and less costly ways to meet your objective.


7D2 | 6D2 | 10-22 | 15-85is | Σ18-35 | Rokinon 14 2.8 | 16-35isL | 24-70isL | 85 1.8 | 100-400 II L | Σ150-600 C | 430ex |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 159
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
May 18, 2014 09:01 |  #8

Romax12 wrote in post #16912284 (external link)
Well, first of all, i would like a better low-light capabalitties. lets say im indoors, and my 18-135 can shoot at f5.6 (3.5 for less than 20mm...) and I can't pass the 1600 iso range cause I start seeing a lot of noise above that level. my options are lowering shutter speed or using a flash, with the latter not always an option. so a camera which can go as high as 6400 or more would be nice.
fps is also something that I would like. when shooting action I find the 3.7 not enough. af, especially in low light scenerios, is pretty much not an option on my t3i.
other than that, I want a better overall body, like durabllity, features, iq and so on

Try a 7D on for size. I have one, replacing my failing 20D and find it quite a good camera.

I never use a camera in machine-gun mode because I've learned to time my shots to catch the peak(s) of an event. If you insist on using machine-gun mode, you'll find that you have a lot of problems with flash lighting keeping up. For single-shot work, though, a properly located and set up flash unit would work wonders for your work.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jerobean
Senior Member
785 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2008
     
May 18, 2014 09:04 |  #9

Romax12 wrote in post #16912265 (external link)
hey everyone
my gear is in my signature.
I spotted a somewhat grea deal on a new canon 6d + 24-70 f4 is for about 2600$.
I can probably sell my t3i and the 18-135 for 700$ (prices in my country are not the same).
so basically I need to invest 2000$ +- for a full frame + a decent (?) lens, and then i will cover 24-200.
I don't think I will need the 2.8 aperture on the walk-around lens, though it might come handy.
problem is it cost almost as much as this lens plus the camera body.
my questions are: Will I benefit from moving to a fullframe? and if so, is the 6d enough?
and what do you think about the 24-70 f4? is it equal to the 2.8 in iq etc'?
do you think the transition to all L-glass and a full frame body worth the price of admission?
thanks!

I would say 2600 for a 6d and a 24-70 is far from a great deal.

buy a used 6d or refurbished one for ~1400, buy a 24-105 for 600. much better deal.


_______________
6d, 24-105L, Tak SMC 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 135L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,264 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6330
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 18, 2014 09:34 |  #10

Jerobean wrote in post #16912546 (external link)
I would say 2600 for a 6d and a 24-70 is far from a great deal.

buy a used 6d or refurbished one for ~1400, buy a 24-105 for 600. much better deal.

agreed, the 24-70F4 + 6D for 2600 is borderline retail prices.....


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,935 posts
Likes: 115
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Dallas TX
     
May 18, 2014 12:42 |  #11

You want better low light ability but you're using slow glass and thinking the solution is FF? Fast glass is a much cheaper solution.

If you're shooting f5.6 ISO 6400 right now, with faster glass you'll be using:
f1.4 ISO 400
f2 ISO 800
f2.8 ISO 1600

Great options for you with your T3i: Sigma 30 1.4, Sigma 18-35 1.8, Canon 30 f2 IS, Tokina 11-16 2.8, 17-5x 2.8 (Tamron,Sigma,Canon)


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,264 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6330
Joined Sep 2007
     
May 18, 2014 16:50 |  #12

BrickR wrote in post #16912871 (external link)
You want better low light ability but you're using slow glass and thinking the solution is FF? Fast glass is a much cheaper solution.

If you're shooting f5.6 ISO 6400 right now, with faster glass you'll be using:
f1.4 ISO 400
f2 ISO 800
f2.8 ISO 1600

Great options for you with your T3i: Sigma 30 1.4, Sigma 18-35 1.8, Canon 30 f2 IS, Tokina 11-16 2.8, 17-5x 2.8 (Tamron,Sigma,Canon)

Yup, ff is great with lowlight, but slapping on an f4 lens...... Makes no sense.

Get FF for better DOF control, sharpness, tonality or if $2600 isn't that painful, go for it.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,464 posts
Gallery: 1790 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 11253
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
May 18, 2014 17:22 |  #13

Romax12 wrote in post #16912284 (external link)
Well, first of all, i would like a better low-light capabalitties. lets say im indoors, and my 18-135 can shoot at f5.6 (3.5 for less than 20mm...) and I can't pass the 1600 iso range cause I start seeing a lot of noise above that level. my options are lowering shutter speed or using a flash, with the latter not always an option. so a camera which can go as high as 6400 or more would be nice.
fps is also something that I would like. when shooting action I find the 3.7 not enough. af, especially in low light scenerios, is pretty much not an option on my t3i.
other than that, I want a better overall body, like durabllity, features, iq and so on

Simple solutions that don't cost you $3k+

Look to improve your post processing practices of ISO/noise reduction. You can use a lot of ISO.

Flash photography is a lot less expensive than simply getting 1 to 1.5 stops better ISO performance for a minimum of $1500+ investment.

Everything you're describing is a 1D series camera. Not a 6D. Not a 7D/70D.

So that's a hefty cost.

Or you can simply learn new technique, and new post processing, and focus on having good glass that gives you the best opportunities.

You say you want better low light ability and fast action capability, and then you go and select an F4 wide angle lens. I think you have a lot of research, learning and soul search to do. Don't buy anything right now.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
melcat
Goldmember
1,122 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
May 19, 2014 04:10 |  #14

Romax12 wrote in post #16912325 (external link)
i usually take photos of family vacation. indoors are events (birthdays, holidays etc').

For this, it would make more sense to learn to use that big flash you have. That's what everyone did back in the film days - you were lucky to manage ISO 3200, and that was with a lot of grain and giving up colour.

And, I don't know what country you're in, but if it's one where compact fluorescent lights are ubiquitous, you will discover that no matter how fast the lens or high the ISO, the quality of the light they give is often poor, and sometimes unfixable in post (e.g. when two different types of bulb are in the one room). That's another reason to prefer flash.

However, it is true that with full frame

- your 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens would be a more useful focal length range.

- a 35mm f/1.4 or 35mm f/2 IS lens becomes useful for shooting the whole gathering, i.e. most things your 70-200 wouldn't handle on full frame. That would be a better lens for your stated purposes than the 24-70 zoom you mentioned.

It's an expensive way to avoid shooting with flash.

Another non-flash solution is the Sony RX1. This is a full frame camera with a 35mm f/2 lens and a Sony sensor that's very good at high ISO (I have not gone above 6400 with mine). It's also good with an external flash.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
draculr
Member
133 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2010
     
May 19, 2014 04:20 |  #15

I'd recommend a 6D and a 35mm f2 IS (or Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art). Might take some getting used to but you'll enjoy it more than a slow standard zoom.


Photography by Peter Georges (external link) - Sydney Wedding and Portrait Photography

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

3,380 views & 0 likes for this thread
Should I upgrade for a 6d + 24-70 f4?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 dsk26894
1177 guests, 294 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.