Legitimately Torn Between APS-C and Full Frame Options

I am wanting to upgrade from my T4i to a better spec'd camera. Instinctively, I want to go FF with the 6D, by all accounts a superb camera and will give me the vastly improved low light and IQ that is so lacking in my T4i. Prices on the 6D are low and getting lower with a likely 6D II out by early next year. Easy decision, right? It it were only that simple.

I have an infant son that the 6D would be perfect for over the next few years. But I also have a 4 and half year old active in outside sports, ballet recitals, etc. for which I know that the AF and FPS of a 70D, 7D and 7D ii would be perfect, especially with my 70-200 f4 IS.

As I see it, the PROS of the 6D are: cost, excellent low light and IQ capability, smaller/lighter than 5Diii; the CONS are: lesser AF capability than current crop cameras and 5Diii, lesser reach than crop, would have to sell excellent Sigma 18-35 Art, low FPS.

With a growing family and only being an enthusiast, budget is an issue, so I am likely priced out of 5DIII.

Here's my question: If I do get the 6D (and sell the T4i), will I regret it every time I try to shoot my daughter in sports/activities, and even my son as he grows older? Initially, I did not think so, but I played around with the 7d II and was blown away by the speed of the FPS, and having read other threads, people do miss the extra reach of the crop sensor.

The 70D looks like a very good option, but I know I will regret not jumping to FF and the improved IQ.

Oh, and last but least, my passion is shooting landscape, but I don't really have the time to pursue that and always find myself shooting family/events far more often.

Ideally I could jump up to 6D and upgrade my T4i to the 70D and get the best (average) of both worlds, but I'm not sure I can swing that with the boss!. Any advice is appreciated, especially from people in similar situations with young children and competing photography interests.

Get the 6d I shoot sports with mine all the time-it can handle it no problem and the IQ high ISO performance is so much better than the cropper.You won't regret IMHO.

Thanks. I know the IQ/ISO difference will be dramatic, so that's where I'm leaning.

Either will serve you well. I had a similar choice and would have had to replace one lens I had just bought. I ended up with a 7d2. However more of my shooting was moving and/or birds. The 7d2 will have better low light than your current camera and not bad compared to the 6d. I know I'm not helping, sorry. In the end though, get the one you want. You can do all the analysis in the world and end up with a camera that doesn't feel right or doesn't grab you emotionally. In this case either camera ticks most of the boxes on the check list. Pick that one that grabs you.

spooky action wrote in post #17593308
Thanks. I know the IQ/ISO difference will be dramatic, so that's where I'm leaning.

Don't forget that you have to use the full frame of the FF sensor to get its "IQ". The 6D has pretty much the same "IQ" as the 7D2 noise-wise, for example, when you only use an equivalent crop from the 6D. The 70D lags a little behind the 7D2 in IQ, but all three cameras have low banding noise, and are much better at high ISOs and low-ISO shadows than many of the other Canon DSLR choices. The less banding noise a camera has, the more you can get away with extreme ISOs or shadow pushing if you only want to display the image at a small size, because banding noise does not disappear like more random noise does when you downsample an image.

The 6D and 7D2 are currently my best FF and APS-C cameras, and I use the 7D2 as my default cameras except for the few situations in which the 6D is superior:

1) When I plan to be shooting at f-numbers below 2..8, in which case the larger pixels of the 6D lose less light to the microlenses on the sensor, and shallow DOF is available that is not with the same angle of view on the 7D2.

2) I want to use my 8mm fisheye or a 10mm EF-s or 12mm FF wide-angle. The 7D2 won't render the full image circle of the fisheye, and is only 3/4 as wide at 10mm as the 6D is at 12mm.


With equivalent FOV and DOF (and therefore, equialent diffraction), I don't find any superiority to the 6D, except when the lens I would be using on 7D2 is not sufficiently sharp compared to what I would be using on the 6D, but when using an extremely sharp FF lens, or an EF-s lens made for a 1.6x crop, the 7D2 can be just as good or better. For example, my EF-s 17-55 IS is sharper than my 24-105/4L IS at the same DOF and FOV, on the 7D2 and 6D, respectively, especially when the 24-105 would be at f/4.

canon rookie wrote in post #17593227
Get the 6d I shoot sports with mine all the time-it can handle it no problem and the IQ high ISO performance is so much better than the cropper.You won't regret IMHO.

Yes, don't buy the Internet BS about how poor the 6D focusing is. It's not a D series but it's far from poor. It does a great job.

Timing > FPS.
Get the 6D and time your shots, and you will be a happy parent

Thank you everyone for your replies. All are very helpful. I think the attractiveness of FF is primarily due to how often I find myself shooting low light situations where my T4i simply cannot keep up. I mainly use the center point for AF even though my Rebel has 9 cross-type points.

In reverse order to your replies:

- I have become accustomed to timing my shots due to using the T4i and, really, have not felt too constrained by the T4i's 5 fps burst rate (6D is 4.5, so not a huge drop off). I also feel like with timing shots I have more control over the outcome and, thus, more of my ability as a photographer is in any given shot (obviously this does not apply for birds and fast moving objects).

- Most of the focusing complaints I have read relate to the lack of any cross-type points beside the center, which I use primarily anyway (focus and then recompose) so that is not a major concern.

- I appreciate the equivalent FOV and DOF comparison between IQ on ff and crop. Unless shooting landscape, I often find myself shooting at faster apertures. Sometimes due to creativity and other times due to the necessity because of the T4i's shortcomings. Again, I think that is why I am drawn to the 6D. I guess I really need to take out the 70D for a test run and see how it performs in low-light conditions and how far I can push the ISO and still be happy with the noise-level. That said, I feel I will always regret not moving up to FF, so I think that's where I'm headed. It is interesting that you use the 7D2 as your default. If possible, I will hold onto the T4i and at least have it my disposal for wildlife, etc. At any rate, it does not look like people are willing to pay enough for my T4i and 18-135 STM to justify selling it.

- I agree. All the time spent reviewing and analyzing becomes paralysis by analysis after a little while.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17594338
Timing > FPS.
Get the 6D and time your shots, and you will be a happy parent

What Jake said.

Tigerkn wrote in post #17594378
What Jake said.

+1

Regarding Timing > FPS, I agree. That said, the machine gun spray of the 7D2 burst just makes my T4i's burst rate feel inadequate, even though it has never been an issue for me. If you haven't tried the 7D2's rapid fire burst rate, it is pretty cool.

John Sheehy wrote in post #17594277
... For example, my EF-s 17-55 IS is sharper than my 24-105/4L IS at the same DOF and FOV, on the 7D2 and 6D, respectively, especially when the 24-105 would be at f/4.

My experience and that of others is that the EF-S 17-55mm/2.8 lens has inconsistent AF, giving blurry shots in landscape-type pictures (focusing on distant objects - roughly a city block away or farther). Canon Canada has acknowledged that this is a design fault of this lens. It is a condition that is poorly documented on the web, but Ken Rockwell refers to it several times in his review.

Many people with this lens tend to rationalize that blurry distant scenes are due to atmospheric haze, etc., but my kit 18-55mm STM lens gives much sharper results.

Contrary to this, many users do seem to consistently get sharp AF results with this lens, and this is something that is a mystery for now. Manual focus dependably gives good results with the 17-55.

My 17-55 autofocuses very inconsistently with my 7D2. That could be a reason not to buy the 7D2 if you plan to buy a fast zoom lens for it. At the very least, if you have bought a 17-55mm, you should test its AF behavior thoroughly during the return period and return it if it is not right. The AF problem cannot be resolved by service.

People complain about the Sigma 18-35 Art and AF problems with the 7D2, as well. If I stick with crop, I would keep that lens, which is fantastic. However, even on my T4i it has an annoying front focusing problem. Even though optics and color are spectacular on that lens, I am done with non-canon lenses and it is one of the reasons pushing me to switch to full-frame.

Lots of folks agonize over the decision between full frame and crop. it really is not that important. Realise that this forum is filled with Enthusiasts who demand the max amount of image quality. Having shot professionally, I am quite happy with a 6 year old crop camera for most shooting, without the need to constantly pull out a full frame camera (which I own!) The average person is overly demanding of noise free shots...they should see the grain of ISO 400 film

Agonize is the right word. It becomes a difficult decision when not shooting professionally and thus having a limited budget. As a result, margin for error is smaller and the wrong choice (as I believe I made with the T4i - not because it is crop, but because after only two years I want more out of my camera), is magnified. That said, I agree that in my decision I probably cannot go wrong between 70D and 6D.

I laughed at the "grain of ISO 400 film" comment.