60D vs 70D vs 7D - Low Light purchase?

gabebalazs wrote in post #16688646
EDIT: playing with the DPreview tool, I believe that the Canon SL1 (100D) is very close to the 70D, almost the same, which is very good for the SL1. The T4i is a bit behind for some reason, which I've known for a while since my wife shoots with that one.

My copy of the SL1 isn't good. It is worse than my previous 7Ds, which frustrates me. Again copy variation plays into all these types of discussions.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16688979
My copy of the SL1 isn't good. It is worse than my previous 7Ds, which frustrates me. Again copy variation plays into all these types of discussions.

That's definitely true. I know TeamSpeed, I was always convinced that you must have had a "defective" 7D back then since it was soo good at high ISOs
Yeah, I also believe that copy variation does exist in camera bodies too. It's interesting how even DPreview's various 18mp Canon bodies measure up against each other in the high ISO department. When comparing them sometimes they show different results than what I get at home (comparing the same bodies as they did).
The differences are small in most cases but it's amazing that even bodies have these copy differences.

That's interesting about the copy variation, never heard of or considered that. Maybe that's why most people say the M doesn't have any advantage over the T2i, when to my eyes there's a pretty clear difference.

the M is definitely better than older crops 7D/60D/t2i, ect. It might not be on paper, but it's easier to clean up. It's like the 5Dc. Technically noisier than older crops, but cleans up nicely and produces better looking photos.

Charlie wrote in post #16689293
the M is definitely better than older crops 7D/60D/t2i, ect. It might not be on paper, but it's easier to clean up. It's like the 5Dc. Technically noisier than older crops, but cleans up nicely and produces better looking photos.

Yeah, that's how I feel about it too. Beyond that though, I use very little NR at ISO3200 on the M and with my T2i I couldn't seem to get a useable file even after I played around with it in LR. Either way, I'm very happy now with all 3 of my cameras

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16689344
Yeah, that's how I feel about it too. Beyond that though, I use very little NR at ISO3200 on the M and with my T2i I couldn't seem to get a useable file even after I played around with it in LR. Either way, I'm very happy now with all 3 of my cameras

Strange, again either copy variation or software used to create the final result...

Here is a completely unadulterated (no post/NR) JPG out of DPP from a raw from my old 7D at 3200. It cleaned up very easily.

http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …666152&k=JqtX8X​G&lb=1&s=O

here is 6400, again straight from raw, no post

http://teamspeed.smugm​ug.com …864790&k=CHVX8x​R&lb=1&s=O

You can compare the sensors here:

http://www.dxomark.com​/Cameras/Compare

The sports rating is what you seem to be interested in.

The 5DII will go to 12800 with the expanded ISO setting enabled, but it aint pretty.

gonzogolf wrote in post #16689704
The 5DII will go to 12800 with the expanded ISO setting enabled, but it aint pretty.

still better than any crop camera I'm sure. Better detail retention too.

I'm sure the 12800 on the 70D might catch up to the 12800 of the 5D2, but below that, I'de bank on the 5D2 to be considerably better.

OP,
I might be wrong. Your requirement seems to be little different than various other FF vs Crop threads in the context of limiting DoF. If your budget allows you to get 70D instead of FF, you can use faster glass for same DOF with given FOV. You can use faster shutter speed or lower ISO. Based on the pictures posted here and various user reviews here, 6D seems to be one amazing camera.

Charlie wrote in post #16689723
still better than any crop camera I'm sure. Better detail retention too.

I'm sure the 12800 on the 70D might catch up to the 12800 of the 5D2, but below that, I'de bank on the 5D2 to be considerably better.

It would be about a stop better.