Thinking of going from full-frame to APS-C

Archibald wrote in post #17982012
It is wise to consider your own specific needs. If you have a lot of important low light situations, bigger sensors would be better.

I have a friend who has a compact super zoom camera and it takes terrific pictures, because he is practically always shooting in good light. He has noticed a reduction of IQ in low light, but those situations are rare for him and the tradeoff is acceptable.

Rebels are a compromise, as all cameras are. I have an SL1 Rebel to back up my 7D2. The IQ of the SL1 is terrific, and I don't notice any need to do MFA on the SL1 - EXCEPT for the 100-400 II with 1.4x extender. That combo would be unusable on the SL1. And the frame rate is a lot lower. And the SL1 only selects whole f stops, like f/11 and f/16 - no f/13. Sometimes that matters. Again, it all comes down to your requirements.

Yes specific needs is all about what you grab in your toolbox.

I just cannot accept that you cannot MA a Rebel. That's to purpose of the price point between a rebel or xxD crop.

As a new adopter of the fuji system I'm finding the 16mpx fuji body and Kit lens produces nicer colours and more micro contrast than a 24-70L mk1 or 24-105L. The 18-55 kit lens is mind boggling for a variable aperture 2.8-4.0 zoom with image stabilization. No micro adjust needed and small light form factor.

If I owned a 6D I'd supplement it with a sony A6300 (lens not cheap) or a Fuji. Last in line would be the Micro 4/3 system. I own a M43 system so I can easily comment that a Sony a6000/6300 or Fuji is more up my alley in IQ and lower light performance.

Lots of aps-c bodies have MFA. Lots of aps-c shooters have no need for MFA, especially if they are shooting f/3.5-5.6 or so zooms. Inexpensive body does not necessarily mean inadequate. I get perfectly good shots with G15.

Bassat wrote in post #17982052
Lots of aps-c bodies have MFA. Lots of aps-c shooters have no need for MFA, especially if they are shooting f/3.5-5.6 or so zooms. Inexpensive body does not necessarily mean inadequate. I get perfectly good shots with G15.

When the 60D hit the streets with no MA that was one of the most ridiculous things Canon has ever done since the 50D came with it.

MA would be required if a canon shooter with a rebel bought a cheaper 17-50 3rd party lens or any f/2.8 zoom. The difference can be huge as far as tack images are concerned.

When i shot the 5d as a primary I'd test a lens at the camera shop or return it in the 2 week grace period to test to assure sharp images at f/1.4 or any aperture @ wideopen. I was just as critical when I used a Canon Xti.

If someone is looking at a rebel they might as well buy an older generation 70D for marginally more than a T6i/T6s.

The rebel series IQ was always almost lateral to many of the xxD "prosumer" canon crop bodies. The lack of MA seems to be the biggest options that were always excluded in the Rebel series.

AlanU wrote in post #17982093
When the 60D hit the streets with no MA that was one of the most ridiculous things Canon has ever done since the 50D came with it.

MA would be required if a canon shooter with a rebel bought a cheaper 17-50 3rd party lens or any f/2.8 zoom. The difference can be huge as far as tack images are concerned.

When i shot the 5d as a primary I'd test a lens at the camera shop or return it in the 2 week grace period to test to assure sharp images at f/1.4 or any aperture @ wideopen. I was just as critical when I used a Canon Xti.

If someone is looking at a rebel they might as well buy an older generation 70D for marginally more than a T6i/T6s.

The rebel series IQ was always almost lateral to many of the xxD "prosumer" canon crop bodies. The lack of MA seems to be the biggest options that were always excluded in the Rebel series.

Oh, Jeez! Lighten up, will ya? I had a 60D for about 4 years. My go to lens was a 15-85. I also had a 28 1.8, 35 IS, 50 (various), 85 1.8, and 135L. I shot them wide open, frequently. I never felt the need for MFA. I am quite sure I'm not the only one. Of course, MFA would have come in handy if I'd had a problem. I didn't.

I did have a T1i that couldn't focus the 135L at f/2, so I get your point. But you have to admit that MFA is a feature that not everyone needs, with every lens. Doncha?

There were quite a few people that could have used MFA on the 60d, based on the threads we had over the years, so I don't think we can underestimate the need for it.

I didn't need MA on any of my lenses on my 60d, in fact, I've been lucky in that none of my lenses have needed MA on any of my bodies.

That said, I did try out 3 different copies of the S18-35 at the shop before picking the sharpest one. Canon left off the MA on the 60d believing more people messed up their AF than corrected it, but that caused a massive outcry that they corrected with the 70d. I think MOST people with xxxd models don't need MA on lenses. But that's taking into account that most people with xxxd models aren't using a lot of 1.4 or 1.2 glass where off focus is easier to see

I too have not seen any focus problems with my 60d or 600d for that matter. All sharp when o do my part.

MFA isn't tied to really fast lenses but really for any time you have narrower dof. You can get this even with an f6.3 long lens.

Im in a similar posting as far as going back to crop.
Having loved my 60D and had no interest in FF a mate showed me his new 5Dmkiii 4 years ago and i was hooked. I dumped crop (fav lens being a 15-85 at the time) and marvelled in the full frame goodness. Of course it was just the camera i had to buy, and ended up spending the same again, plus a load more, on lenses.
Over the past 4 years ive loved the images ive been getting, but always missed the FL i was used to with crops. Every now and then i would use my 650D, but never really found it satisfying like my old 60D.

Now ive just ordered a 80D, and although ill be using both for a while im expecting to get rid of the 5Dmkiii by the end of the year. I also have a Sony a6000 and it made me realise that while IQ wasnt as good as the 5Dmkiii, i was still happy with most of the images. Being able to use my Canon lenses on it helped, but at no point have i really missed the IQ from the 5Dmkiii, except under very low light.

As far as MFA goes, ive never really needed it on my 5Dmkiii, but during the time i had my 60D as well i did find a few lenses could really have doe with it on that camera.

this thread is like another form of gear lust, why would you own both fuji and canon crop sensors? It's like mental gymnastics, just pick one and stick with it, you're not saving much money if any by shooting two different brands in that manner (no cross adapting of lenses). You're better off two cameras of the same brand.

My guess is that the size factor is nice, as is the ISO handling. Some people are very much able to context switch easily between different products, others are a bit less so. I used to be the former, but am becoming more the latter.

Charlie wrote in post #17984237
this thread is like another form of gear lust, why would you own both fuji and canon crop sensors? It's like mental gymnastics, just pick one and stick with it, you're not saving much money if any by shooting two different brands in that manner (no cross adapting of lenses). You're better off two cameras of the same brand.

Charlie I can see your logic here.....

Every individual has a different toolbox.

I've never been so adventurous before when it comes to camera gear. The Canon gear to me is my go to no surprises when i shoot in good to dreadful lighting situations.

My M43 gear has withered and I've virtually sold most of it now. I'm keeping the Panasonic gh3 as a video setup.

My Fuji gear is my small form factor camera body that is mirrorless so I do not desire lightening fast AF or video from it. No back or front focus so far with this body.

The Fuji files are so different from Canon. Even the Raw files are pleasant looking with very little PP manipulation. The images have a totally different flavour to Canon. I'm getting decent files with a fast prime at ISO 5000 so the Fuji is meeting my casual needs.

The Canon gear has a certain look and my keeper rate is incredibly high. Canon has a sharp high resolution look what I'm accustomed too. The Fuji on the other hand has a very pleasant slightly softer looking file that still retains sharpness. The Fuji look and colours is simply different and for my casual application I'm extremely happy with it.

I'm not too excited about buying an adapter and using non native lenses on a mirrorless body. However I'm still eager to try sony.

I'd like to add an 80d to my Canon gear for dual pixel technology for video. I should really be getting another 5d3 or possibly a 7dmk2 for dual memory card slots.

I use Canon and Samsung, but I only use Canon for paid stuff. My Samsung NX stuff is for personal use and I actually prefer the files from my NX300 to my 70d/60d/SL1. Not to mention traveling, mirrorless is just SO much better for packing than any Canon DSLR.

I find zero problems running two systems. I pick up either camera and am equally adept with both. They serve different needs