6d vs 7d mark ii for weddings

I'm looking to add a second canon camera to my wedding kit. The question I have for everyone is which would you choose, a full frame sensor with better high ISO or a crop sensor with more advanced autofocus? Dual card backup is a big positive for me whenever I need to shoot as second shooter, but I definitely appreciate the high-ISO of my 5DIII. I will be shooting with more speedlites from now on though, so perhaps the bigger concern is autofocus performance in low-light. I've shot with a 7D as backup before but the AF was lousy in low-light, no dual card backup was an issue, and high ISO and the look of the images were pretty atrocious. On the other hand, I've used a 5DII and I hated the autofocus system even for studio portraits (was using a D700 as my main back then).

7DII
+65 cross-type autofocus points
+level indicator in viewfinder (I really like this for landscape and architecture in the 5DIII, I don't use it in weddings because it can't be used simultaneously with AF on the 5DIII)
+dual card backup with UDMA7 CF & UHS-I SDXC
+better af selector on body and grip
- APS-C sensor
- lower high iso (may be moot point with speedlite except for ambient light)

6D
+"full frame" sensor
+better high iso
+more DR
- single SDXC card slot

+/-? 7DII = different grain characteristic or behavior at high-iso?
+/-? does center af point af better in low light? outer points?
+/-?

If you hated 5D2 AF, then then 6D isn't a whole lot better. The center point is the only cross type but it is -3EV sensitive so can lock focus even in very low light. I recommend getting another 5D3, purely because its nice to have the same body so its seamless to switch between the 2 cameras. While yes the 7D2 has awesome AF, its kind of over kill for wedding work, and the crop sensor will behave differently to your main body in more ways than 1. Out of the 2, I would say 6D as backup to maintain full frame benefits. You already have a 7D, so going a model up will only yield about a stop or 2 better ISO performance, but still won't be on the same level of image quality as a FF sensor.

Are you planning to do a transition from Nikon?

Just curious but wouldn't it just be easier to buy a 5d3 and remove buyers remorse or compromise with your "wants".

I've appreciated having my 5dmk2 on my hip on my spider holster. This way I can have an 85L or 70-200 for long reach. My main camera would be equipped with either a 16-35, 24L? 35L? depending on the light environment. My 2nd camera is used extensively so I dont really call it a backup sitting in a bag.

On the wide end AF speed is appreciated as you compose. However with a longer lens using the 5dmk2 doing the "focus/recompose" has never really failed me even wider apertures. Only drawback with the 5dmk2 is not nearly as good at high iso performance compared to the 6d or 5dmk3.

You did mention you'll be using more speedlites so this lesser performance in high ISO (7dmk2) is "not" going to be an issue. IQ will not be equivalent to a FF and slightly less control of dof.

For weddings I dont think you need the most advanced AF system. You may appreciate the faster fps during a bouquet throw but otherwise I dont think theres much "sports shooting" required. Couple and party walking down the aisle is hardly challenging even for a 5dmk2/6d AF system. Since you already have the 5d3 as a main camera your ground is covered for any challenges thrown at you.

5d3

However the 6d would be my choice between the two camera's you mentioned.

For weddings, I'd go with the 6D over the 7DII. The things about shooting weddings, is that you often get thrust into terrible lighting situations, and are coupled with restrictions about what you can do in terms of controlling lighting. i.e. many churches that don't allow flash...if you have a particularly dimly lit church, expect to push your ISO up aggressively.

The reception venue may also prove to be problematic, even if you are using speed lights. A couple of weeks back, I shot a reception in a huge, open venue, with black ceilings and dim ambient lights. Speedlights were basically only useful for lighting the subject, as there was no way to diffuse the light into the ambient scene. As such, my second shooter and I were forced to push our ISO's aggressively to avoid having 'cave shots', in which the background is overly underexposed. I shot on my 5DIII and a7r....he shot on a 60D and 7D MKI. His shots were 'good enough' for documentary purposes, but were so littered with noise that I didn't use them unless I absolutely had to. He went out and added a 6D to his kit a few days after the shoot lol.

I've also been in situations where I'm forced to take posed formals of the bride and groom and wedding party at night (especially at this time of year, with daylight savings time), and given how tight the schedule a wedding schedule usually is, don't have time to put a complicated lighting set-up together. In these circumstances, I'll usually fire a flagged speedlight into a reflector (held by my second shooter), but still need to push my ISO to properly expose the ambient scene

I shoot a crop at weddings (I decided to invest in lighting before going to ff). Nothing wrong with crop, but if you've already got all the ff glass, you're negating the biggest benefit (IMO) to a crop - cost.

Is this a backup, or a third body?

I ask, because some people get different formats in a "backup" body because they really are just thinking of the camera as a handy second body.

But if it really is a backup, do you have the lenses you need if your primary body dies? Is your widest zoom still wide enough?

Conversely, is the feature set of the 6D something you can live with if the 5D dies?

The best 5D3 backup is probably another 5D3. If you can give the client a product just as good with a cheaper backup body, then you have spent too much on your primary body. If not, then the backup isn't really a backup.

mystik610 wrote in post #17381606
For weddings, I'd go with the 6D over the 7DII. The things about shooting weddings, is that you often get thrust into terrible lighting situations, and are coupled with restrictions about what you can do in terms of controlling lighting. i.e. many churches that don't allow flash...if you have a particularly dimly lit church, expect to push your ISO up aggressively.

I agree, full frame certainly has the advantages shooting in low light

I have a 6D/5D3 combo and I love it.

I wouldn't chose a 7D2 over a 6D for weddings.

My last wedding was with a 6D and a 7D (1).

It was an actual west coast hurricane day, so the light was incredibly low. Someone actually got sucked out of the barn. I'd shot some pre-shots the day before when there was sun. I've been retired for a while and sold all my wedding gear, when I re-bought cameras, it was for fun and not for work. I don't really consider the 6D a working camera for a couple of reasons. It's image quality is amazing, no arguments there.

Canon saw fit to limit both it's flash sync speed (which can be over ridden on a good flash...by using high speed sync) and it's shutter speed. Lots of times (on a sunny day) you might want to use a fast lens and do some narrow DOF shots of details (like the rings etc) and it's impossible with the 6D. You top out at 1/4000. Lets say you want to isolate the bride...you have to move her in the shade or move the aperture to F4 or 5.6 etc. completely losing the benefit of having a (in my case 35 1.4). So for me, that would be a deal breaker if I was going back into the business. Super frustrating. The flash sync speed almost made me send it back originally until I figured out I could over ride it on the flash itself.

As to the IQ in low light and high ISO, amazing. 6D iso 2500 no flash 35 1.4 @ 1.4. This was at the height of the storm. very little power in the barn but you'd never know it. Light NR only

IMAGE LINK: http://lcimages.zenfol​io.com/img/s5/v118/p77​7996294-5.jpg

Permagrin wrote in post #17383854
My last wedding was with a 6D and a 7D (1).

It was an actual west coast hurricane day, so the light was incredibly low. Someone actually got sucked out of the barn. I'd shot some pre-shots the day before when there was sun. I've been retired for a while and sold all my wedding gear, when I re-bought cameras, it was for fun and not for work. I don't really consider the 6D a working camera for a couple of reasons. It's image quality is amazing, no arguments there.

Canon saw fit to limit both it's flash sync speed (which can be over ridden on a good flash...by using high speed sync) and it's shutter speed. Lots of times (on a sunny day) you might want to use a fast lens and do some narrow DOF shots of details (like the rings etc) and it's impossible with the 6D. You top out at 1/4000. Lets say you want to isolate the bride...you have to move her in the shade or move the aperture to F4 or 5.6 etc. completely losing the benefit of having a (in my case 35 1.4). So for me, that would be a deal breaker if I was going back into the business. Super frustrating. The flash sync speed almost made me send it back originally until I figured out I could over ride it on the flash itself.

So because you lose 1 stop of shutter speed that equals losing 3 stops of aperture...? I think you're far overflowing the issue. If it were really that much of a problem (which it isn't, it's only 1 stop which could be made up by shooting at ISO50) you could just get an ND filter... problem solved.

As for the flash sync, again, the difference between the 1/180s of the 6D and the 1/250s of the 5D isn't even worth mentioning imo, it's 1/3 of a stop...

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17383940
So because you lose 1 stop of shutter speed that equals losing 3 stops of aperture...? I think you're far overflowing the issue. If it were really that much of a problem (which it isn't, it's only 1 stop which could be made up by shooting at ISO50) you could just get an ND filter... problem solved.

As for the flash sync, again, the difference between the 1/180s of the 6D and the 1/250s of the 5D isn't even worth mentioning imo, it's 1/3 of a stop...

Well, it is a big deal if you want a shallow depth of field in the sun...again, it's my personal preference. I've had many cameras over the years (nikon and canon) and know what I like, what I would actually take on a job and what I wouldn't. The 6D to me isn't a pro camera. It's a great hobby camera but I don't think it's limitations are viable for work. Again, just me...

Permagrin wrote in post #17384165
Well, it is a big deal if you want a shallow depth of field in the sun...again, it's my personal preference. I've had many cameras over the years (nikon and canon) and know what I like, what I would actually take on a job and what I wouldn't. The 6D to me isn't a pro camera. It's a great hobby camera but I don't think it's limitations are viable for work. Again, just me...

A one stop neutral density filter + a speedlight with HSS will overcome the "shortcomings" of the 6D. I don't own a 6D, but I'd rather deal with the minor inconvenience of a neutral density filter and HSS, if the alternative was to go with a crop sensor camera. I'd take a better sensor and better low light performance over that any day of the week.

mystik610 wrote in post #17384175
A one stop neutral density filter + a speedlight with HSS will overcome the "shortcomings" of the 6D. I don't own a 6D, but I'd rather deal with the minor inconvenience of a neutral density filter and HSS, if the alternative was to go with a crop sensor camera. I'd take a better sensor and better low light performance over that any day of the week.

I did use the speedlight with HSS. That definitely worked around that issue. Like I said I would have sent the camera back over that.

I don't really like using a lot of filters when I'm shooting portraits. Again you are dealing with (even nice filters) image degradation every time you add something to the glass. And again, it's my own personal preference. I completely agree that the 6D has excellent IQ, as I think I mentioned in my post. I was one of the first adopters and I just wish that I'd known it's foibles before I bought. Then if I wanted to, I would have either purchased it anyway or not.

I simply posted what I think are it's legitimately weak areas. The OP can do whatever they choose...they may, like you, prefer the filters etc. I managed to do fine on that last wedding under terrible circumstances but I don't like having to "work around" my gear as well as environmental issues etc. I like to not have to think about the gear at all.

One thing about weddings is your never be able to predict lighting. You can prepare for the worst though.......

Tough decision if your particular about dual memory cards and 1/8000.

I've been fortunate to have no issues with my CF cards while using my 5dmk2. I appreciate the 1/8000 max shutter and robust CF memory cards. In low light in the evenings if i must shoot "no flash/available light" I can do well with the 5dmk2 within reason with fast primes but the 5dmk3 is definitely the goto. Speedlight usage I dont care what I use since you can document alot with pig slow AF of the 5dmk2 with flash for majority of wedding activities.

I'd love to purchase a matching 5d3 to the primary body. 5dmk2 covers the faster shutter speeds for outdoor bright environments and still is a decent low light performer. 6d is a great body for extremely low light and if SD cards and 1/4000 is not an issue the 6d maybe a great option.

OP......make a list of pros/cons and go from there.

Permagrin wrote in post #17384165
Well, it is a big deal if you want a shallow depth of field in the sun...again, it's my personal preference. I've had many cameras over the years (nikon and canon) and know what I like, what I would actually take on a job and what I wouldn't. The 6D to me isn't a pro camera. It's a great hobby camera but I don't think it's limitations are viable for work. Again, just me...

Again, I think you're overblowing the issue... personal preference or not. I shoot a lot with f1.4 glass and I can't even find any shots on my flickr at 1/4000s... can you post an example where you needed faster than 1/4000s?

And for flash sync... again, we're not talking a huge difference, 1/3 a stop is as near as makes no difference.

The lack of dual cards I can see as an argument, but these days card failures are few and far between as long as you take care of your cards and retire them when you should (every couple of years).

The fact that people put weight on these inconsequential "features" (or lack thereof) is exactly why Canon makes the cameras the way they do... it's all marketing, and guess what... it's working