input needed

I am a hobbiest and currently am shooting a 7D. I love landscape but also shoot sports wildlife and some portrait. The portrait is growing a little at a time but my favorite is landscape long exposure with water movement. My question is this, I am thinking I would like a full frame to go along with my 7D and was looking at the 6D and 5D mark iii which do you all feel would be a better fit for my interest? Or should I just upgrade my 7D to the mark ii and stick with that?

You don't mention what lenses you have or how much money you want to spend.

If you have a big investment in EF-S lenses then you may want to stick with the APS-C format but I don't know that the 7D2 would get you a lot. There are several threads comparing the 7D and the 7D2.

If you have unlimited funds purchase a 1DX or 5D3 and a 7D2 and use the one that works best for the particular situation.

Do you need the low light performance of a FF?

Tom_D wrote in post #17259326
You don't mention what lenses you have or how much money you want to spend.

If you have a big investment in EF-S lenses then you may want to stick with the APS-C format but I don't know that the 7D2 would get you a lot. There are several threads comparing the 7D and the 7D2.

If you have unlimited funds purchase a 1DX or 5D3 and a 7D2 and use the one that works best for the particular situation.

The only lenses I currently have are the Sigma 8-16mm, efs 10-22, 85mm1.8, 100-400l and the kit lens 28-135. Its only a hobby so unlimited funds are sum what limited.

xinvisionx wrote in post #17259336
Do you need the low light performance of a FF?

Low light performance would be nice. Between the 6D and 5D mark iii which handles low light long exposures best?

Disclaimer: I only own a 7D, and (for my personal needs/wants) I will soon be upgrading to a 7Dii.

I have heard from several people I know that the 6D is a fantastic body for low-light landscape and starscape photography. The IQ is excellent, and the dynamic range is quite good as well.

I've personally used my 7D to very good effect for studio and location portrait work. While there may be benefits inherent to FF sensors for this type of work, I have not personally felt limited by the 7D in this regard.

I have used my 7D for quite a bit of low-light, high-action photography (high school football/basketball, concerts, etc.). This is where it struggles a little. It's not great at the higher ISOs needed for these venues. The camera HAS limited me in these areas - given that I'm shooting good lenses with larger apertures and still bumping up against (and exceeding) the limits of the camera.

So, if you primarily want to expand on your landscape work, it sounds like you should go with a 6D and keep your 7D for action photography - assuming you don't need the low-light capabilities.

I'm going with the 7Dii because of the low-light focusing and better high ISO performance. I suppose I would prefer the 5d mkiii (or 1Dx - yeah right!!) if money were no object. It would simply cost too much for me to make the shift in terms of lenses at this point. That, and the 7D mkii has a host of other features and attributes that make it a pretty easy decision for me at this point.

jsvphoto wrote in post #17259502
Disclaimer: I only own a 7D, and (for my personal needs/wants) I will soon be upgrading to a 7Dii.

I have heard from several people I know that the 6D is a fantastic body for low-light landscape and starscape photography. The IQ is excellent, and the dynamic range is quite good as well.

I've personally used my 7D to very good effect for studio and location portrait work. While there may be benefits inherent to FF sensors for this type of work, I have not personally felt limited by the 7D in this regard.

I have used my 7D for quite a bit of low-light, high-action photography (high school football/basketball, concerts, etc.). This is where it struggles a little. It's not great at the higher ISOs needed for these venues. The camera HAS limited me in these areas - given that I'm shooting good lenses with larger apertures and still bumping up against (and exceeding) the limits of the camera.


So, if you primarily want to expand on your landscape work, it sounds like you should go with a 6D and keep your 7D for action photography - assuming you don't need the low-light capabilities.

I'm going with the 7Dii because of the low-light focusing and better high ISO performance. I suppose I would prefer the 5d mkiii (or 1Dx - yeah right!!) if money were no object. It would simply cost too much for me to make the shift in terms of lenses at this point. That, and the 7D mkii has a host of other features and attributes that make it a pretty easy decision for me at this point.

Thanks for your opinion. I too love my 7D thats what makes this hard for me. Not that I'M selling the 7D... its, will I see improvements to my landscape/portrait photos enough to justify also having a full frame camera.

6D with T&S lens.

I am not a 7D,6D,5D3 user but I have played with all 3 of them. I couldn't decide either so I went for the Nuclear option and got a 1DX - but I was lucky enough to have funds available at the time (wish I had them now!).
For low light performance the 6D is shaded (just) by the 1DX in the Canon range and closely followed by the 5D3. For overall IQ the 6D may be the best but it is close!
If high fps and sophisticated AF are not you top priorities then the 6D is hard to beat. If you need better/more flexible AF then the 5D3 is the way to go - at a small loss in very low light AF and ISO performance. The 1DX is the best of both but at a price!
For me, personally, the 6D looks like the best backup/landscape option in the Canon range due to it's IQ/light weight and reasonable price. However my priorities are probably different to yours!

Not sure if asking for input is making my choice easier after all the great opinions my thoughts are spinning keep the comments coming