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 General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
Thread started 03 Jan 2018 (Wednesday) 14:08
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

curious about the Canon 5D line

 
anitaw2
Senior Member
Avatar
281 posts
Likes: 117
Joined Jun 2015
Location: Canada
     
Jan 03, 2018 14:08 |  #1

I'm thinking maybe it's time to try a FF camera. I would buy used because I'm not ready to invest a lot of money right now. I shoot a lot in low light, which my 7D really struggles with (bad at high ISO). I don't really do sports anymore, my daughter is done swimming. I've never used a 5D but a lot of people here seem to praise it. Which copy should I go with? I hear a lot of good and bad things about the 6D so not sure if I want to put money on that. any feedback would be great.


Anita W.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,709 posts
Gallery: 1101 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 8048
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
Post edited 5 months ago by MalVeauX. (6 edits in all)
     
Jan 03, 2018 14:33 |  #2

anitaw2 wrote in post #18532605 (external link)
I'm thinking maybe it's time to try a FF camera. I would buy used because I'm not ready to invest a lot of money right now. I shoot a lot in low light, which my 7D really struggles with (bad at high ISO). I don't really do sports anymore, my daughter is done swimming. I've never used a 5D but a lot of people here seem to praise it. Which copy should I go with? I hear a lot of good and bad things about the 6D so not sure if I want to put money on that. any feedback would be great.

6D would be appropriate for what you're looking to do. Some incredible deals right now in the for sale board on a 6D or two ($700~800). This is not my ad, and I have no association, but this price is a no brainer: here and here. For the low light, this price cannot be topped.

There's more to low light than simply high ISO performance. There's AF locking in low light, which the 6D does at -3EV with the center point (the 5D2 can't do that, and the 5D3 can't do it either at this level).

The 5D2 has slightly less top ISO performance, but significantly weaker overall AF engine, this body has not aged well for it's price. The 5D3 has similar ISO performance to the 6D, but the 6D still tops it but only by a hair at highest ISO values. The 5D3 has significantly better AF all around, but the 6D still beats it for low light AF with the center point being significant more sensitive in low light than the 5D3 can manage (but only center point and only in low light; in good light the 5D3 has the superior AF engine and points). Resolution is a total wash amongst them. The 6D has a cap of 1/4000s shutter, and the 5D's have 1/8000s shutter. This really only matters if you find yourself using F1.4 in the brightest possible light (and you can always throw a 1~2 stop ND filter or CPL on there and cut that difference out). For the cost, around $700~800, the 6D is simply the better purchase. The 5D3 is the better overall camera, but at $1200~1500 used, basically double, and the 6D still has better (by a hair) high ISO and better center point low light AF sensitivity (-3 EV).

If you want to take it to the next level on a dime, for low light, then the Sony A7S body is the next price tier to consider ($1000ish; you can mount Canon glass via an adapter and it works great). The A7S has significantly better high ISO performance than all of the above. AF is not superb for action, but it's good in low light, but key being the significant high ISO performance difference over all the 5D bodies except the 5DIV ($2500~$3k). Again an adapter lets you use basically any glass you want with the Sony body. It's also a little quieter, being mirrorless. It's ISO performance at $1k cannot be matched currently by Canon in that price range.

After that, prices go up significantly (especially for a Canon high ISO body, such as a 5DIV or 1DX). Otherwise, you look to Nikon or Sony bodies if you want full frame and better ISO performance.

If you simply get a modern crop, you don't need full frame for high ISO, a modern crop is going to be better than the 7D by over 1 stop anyways, so you don't have to go full frame for this endeavor.

Very best,


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kf095
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,282 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 220
Joined Dec 2009
Location: Canada, Ontario, Milton
     
Jan 03, 2018 15:13 |  #3

6D.


Old Site (external link). M-E and ME blog (external link). Film Flickr (external link). my DigitaL and AnaLog Gear.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,349 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 459
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jan 03, 2018 18:28 |  #4

Considering at least one generation older used FF bodies that are better than the 7D, your options are the 5D3 and 6D. I would say these two choices will have similar image quality, and the most relevant difference probably comes down to the AF systems.

Basically, the 5D3 will cost you more and it has a better AF system. The 5D3 has cross sensitive points scattered across a fair bit of the frame, and in my experience it can be counted on to focus quickly and accurately with all of them.

The 6D has one very good AF point in the center of the frame, and the rest are not good in low light and a step back in all light. If you are the kind of person happy with mostly using center point focus (focus recompose, focus and crop) then the 6D will work fine and save some money.

FWIW, I didn't consider the 5D2 because it is a step down in IQ from the other choices, and the AF module is actually worse than the 6D. The original 5D (I still have one, my daughter uses it) feels very out of date by now.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim1970
Senior Member
Avatar
582 posts
Gallery: 96 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 319
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jan 03, 2018 19:06 as a reply to  @ JeffreyG's post |  #5

I know the 6DII has received a lot of bad press for lack of DR, but the DR is just as good (if not better) than the 5DIII. Unless you really need the 1/8000 SS, or the better AF (just slightly) the 6DII beats the 5DIII in just about every other way. With the recent price drops, you can get a new 6DII for not much more than what used 5DIII's are going for.



Gear

Flickr (external link) | Web Page (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,862 posts
Likes: 693
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Jan 16, 2018 21:38 |  #6

There is one aspect of the 6D2 which I never thought I would like but, found myself in love with! That is the articulating touch screen.

This is great for video (for my uses I don't need 4K video). One of the things I really like about the touch screen is that I can pull focus from one point to another (I use a stylus) and I can vary the change of focus speed. This looks very professional...

The touch screen makes shooting a focus stacked series of still images very easy. Just touch the screen when you want the focus and it will focus on that point and shoot.

I got the 6D2 with an OEM battery grip, two extra 3rd party batteries and a 3rd party charger as well as a 64 Gig SD card and a Canon Pixma Pro 100 printer with a 50 Pack of 13" x 19" Canon paper for $1650 WITH AN ADDITIONAL $350 Mail In Rebate.

Another nice thing about video with this camera is that it has onboard image stabilization for video. The onboard IS and the IS in my 35mm f/2 IS lens makes moving with this outfit a joy to do. Virtually no camera shake even without a stabilizer added to the package.

The autofocus is better than my 5D2 but, not quite as good as my 7D2 since the autofocus points are centered in the middle of the frame rather than being spread out.

It will focus using my 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS ii lens and 1.4x TC....


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

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

827 views & 0 likes for this thread
curious about the Canon 5D line
FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
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 brotherbear86
879 guests, 373 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.