I have a 60D but I want Full Frame for portrait and landscape. 6D or 5D iii?

Hermelin wrote in post #16612779
Not sure why you would need better AF than 6D for portrait and landscapes.

Exactly. If you want FF for these situations a 6D will do the job admirably.

I would recommend the 6D and either a 35L, 50L, or older 85L mk I lens for the same cost as the 5D III body. Since you already own the 24-105L

Kanye wrote in post #16614286
Anything over a 60d is an improvement, ff-wise.

Traded my 60D for a 5D classic. Never looked back.

Yeah, right - whatever.

There are horses for courses. I chose the 60D for my needs. I don't need a FF, I certainly don't need the hit on my finances to replace both body and glass.

Plus I'm absolutely happy with what I have.

Preeb wrote in post #16614328
Yeah, right - whatever.

There are horses for courses. I chose the 60D for my needs. I don't need a FF, I certainly don't need the hit on my finances to replace both body and glass.

Plus I'm absolutely happy with what I have.

Yeah, me too, I might get a 60D second body if I want back-up. But still, at this point I wouldn't make a non-FF my primary body.

Trust me, that 100L feels a lot sweeter on a FF.

I moved from xti to 6d. Wow. Put the savings into 70-200ii at the time. Had the kit 24-105 and was good to go. At that time it was about 1500 difference which almost paid for a great deal,on the 70-200. Had rebate and a 10% off amazon coupon...haven't seen that again. For me I'd love to have the 5d3 but I'd rather have the 6d and the 70-200. For sports I use the center point and then crop. It has been great even for that.

I upgraded to FF about 7 months ago and went with the 6D after much deliberation. Can honestly say that I couldn't be happier with the performance. Amazing camera at higher ISO and definitely competes with the 5Diii for the price.

6D for what you want if saving money matters to you.
Portraits on full frame are nicer than on a crop, this is my experience after shooting with both.
The AF of the 6D is perfectly fine for portraits, I shoot with lenses between f/1.4 and f/2 most of the time and AF is perfectly fine (actually more accurate than my 7D and 70D). Even the off-center points are usable as long as you're not shooting people running around

For landscape with the 6D just take a look at this thread and review:

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1354422

Jessecoria wrote in post #16612645
Hi all,
I want to upgrade my stuff from a 60D to a Full Frame camera. I want to shoot portrait and landscapes. Should I buy a 6d or a 5d iii? Or should I wait for a 6D with better AF?
please help me...

6D, much better and save money for a great portrait lens

For landscape you're likely to be shooting at f/8 or f/11 with manual focus, and be out in daylight.
Thus, any lens on any camera will give good results... composition is the key. High ISO is not needed.
In such situations your mates mobile phone pictures can look just as good as your DSLR.

Obviously for landscapes a decent solid tripod is a must.
A typical 18-xx or 17-xx lens on your 60D will be fine for landscapes.
Wide angle lenses are useful. Canon and Tokina do some good wide lenses for your 60D.
You could though not bother with a wide angle lens and do a multi-shot stitch in photoshop.

For portraits this is where you really need a DSLR... you want bokeh.
Keep your 60D and invest in a fast prime for portraits, probably a 50mm or 85mm.
Also invest in some lighting/flash.

Ask yourself one simple question... what actual gains are you hoping to get with going full frame.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16613625
I prefer MF for both portraits and landscapes since the subject isn't moving. That said, the 6D for me is actually the better camera thanks to the EG-S focusing screen

You just have to ask yourself if you need the advanced 5D AF, if you don't the 6D is the better camera for numerous reasons IMO.

Then the cheapest option would be a mamiya 645. medium format high quality and MF

For what she wants to shoot, 6D all day. Unless the extra cash becomes available, mark III FTW.

davidfarina wrote in post #16617726
Then the cheapest option would be a mamiya 645. medium format high quality and MF

For very low ISO, yes. Unfortunately I've been too spoiled by digital to go to film...

Wait a few months for the 7D Mark II and have the best of the 60D, 70D, 6D and 5D Mark III . I think for the hobbiest the 6D IQ is on par with the 5DMIII. If you want to program AF points and have the pinache of owning the 5DMIII and extra $$$ then undoubtedly you cant go wrong with the 5DMIII.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16621265
For very low ISO, yes. Unfortunately I've been too spoiled by digital to go to film...

Shoot MF digital then. The Pentax 645D goes for about $9800.

EOS5DC wrote in post #16626149
Shoot MF digital then. The Pentax 645D goes for about $9800.

Or I can just stick with what I have