New body help for Astro novice

I currently have a 70D and a 10-22 that I use for land/seascapes, night shooting, light painting and my two attempts at Astro. I have always had a huge fascination with the stars and want to shoot more of it.

The 70d gets noticeably noisy with anything over 800, and my most recent and best attempt at shooting the MW was good imo but I can see a move to full frame will help immensely. I recently just purchased a 16-35 F4 as a step closer the jump to ff and hopefully better shots.

I've been looking into the 6d and the 5d3. I'll be keeping the 70d because of its video ability, flip out screen and weight etc.

So out of the 6d and the 5d3, which is better for Astro, or is there no real difference. Is one a smidge better at higher iso control? I know the auto focus for action is much better in the 5d3, but I can live without it, if the 6d is going to give me the same image quality for a much cheaper price.

I will be using this full frame for all future land/seascapes if that helps sway an opinion. I am asking here though, as I believe either will be fine in daylight, but Correct me if I'm wrong in guessing night time photography will find weaknesses easier.

Thanks in advance

muvro wrote in post #17723244
...............
I've been looking into the 6d and the 5d3. I'll be keeping the 70d because of its video ability, flip out screen and weight etc.

So out of the 6d and the 5d3, which is better for Astro, or is there no real difference. Is one a smidge better at higher iso control? I know the auto focus for action is much better in the 5d3, but I can live without it, if the 6d is going to give me the same image quality for a much cheaper price.
............

Thanks in advance

OK the 5D and 6D don't have flip out screens ( don't think the 6D does ) I have the 5D3 ... the video on the 5D is superb !!! seriously
haven't tried the 6D for that it may well be also

they say the 6D had a slight edge over the 5D for low light work. Plus and the really BIG plus, it's around 1k cheaper

both are great cameras, you wouldn't go wrong with either of them ... decide what your budget can afford
good advice .... buy the 6D and put that saved 1k towards some serious glass like the 70-200mm IS USM Mk2

Dave

muvro wrote in post #17723244
I currently have a 70D and a 10-22 that I use for land/seascapes, night shooting, light painting and my two attempts at Astro. I have always had a huge fascination with the stars and want to shoot more of it.

The 70d gets noticeably noisy with anything over 800, and my most recent and best attempt at shooting the MW was good imo but I can see a move to full frame will help immensely. I recently just purchased a 16-35 F4 as a step closer the jump to ff and hopefully better shots.

I've been looking into the 6d and the 5d3. I'll be keeping the 70d because of its video ability, flip out screen and weight etc.

So out of the 6d and the 5d3, which is better for Astro, or is there no real difference. Is one a smidge better at higher iso control? I know the auto focus for action is much better in the 5d3, but I can live without it, if the 6d is going to give me the same image quality for a much cheaper price.

I will be using this full frame for all future land/seascapes if that helps sway an opinion. I am asking here though, as I believe either will be fine in daylight, but Correct me if I'm wrong in guessing night time photography will find weaknesses easier.

Thanks in advance

Heya,

Don't bother with a full frame camera to get less than 1 stop of ISO improvement if astro is your thing. You'll spend $1k~2k for no real good reason here.

If you really want to shoot astro, get a tracker.

A simple, affordable tracker, like the Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer. You will get magnitudes more light this way, than trying to use a full frame sensor and still being stuck at short duration exposure times.

You can keep your 70D and use any lens, not just fast ones, at low ISO, and get incredible amounts of light by using long exposure instead via a tracker.

Very best,

Thanks for the advice guys.

I ended up getting a good deal on a second hand low shutter 5d3. I gave it a run over the weekend doing my first attempt at stitching images.

https://www.flickr.com …30369883@N03/21​999412521/

The more I learn about the body, the more I am falling in love with it. With the 16-35 it's taking beautiful landscapes and I think the 16-35 is much sharper at the edges compared to the 10-22.

I have enjoyed the few times I've been able to get out for some Astrophotography, but it's not what I do most of.

Thanks again.

muvro wrote in post #17737074
Thanks for the advice guys.

I ended up getting a good deal on a second hand low shutter 5d3. I gave it a run over the weekend doing my first attempt at stitching images.

https://www.flickr.com …30369883@N03/21​999412521/

The more I learn about the body, the more I am falling in love with it. With the 16-35 it's taking beautiful landscapes and I think the 16-35 is much sharper at the edges compared to the 10-22.

I have enjoyed the few times I've been able to get out for some Astrophotography, but it's not what I do most of.

Thanks again.

Well done!

Very best,

muvro wrote in post #17737074
Thanks for the advice guys.

I ended up getting a good deal on a second hand low shutter 5d3. I gave it a run over the weekend doing my first attempt at stitching images.

https://www.flickr.com …30369883@N03/21​999412521/

The more I learn about the body, the more I am falling in love with it. With the 16-35 it's taking beautiful landscapes and I think the 16-35 is much sharper at the edges compared to the 10-22.

I have enjoyed the few times I've been able to get out for some Astrophotography, but it's not what I do most of.

Thanks again.

lookin' good keep up the good experimenting

Dave