Recent content by DB_Cro

The only way I'd skip the 80D was if I already owned the 70D.

I understood what you said, I know about all the newer sensors, I'm just commenting on how bad the 18mpix is. 70D is better then T6s says DXOMark, if only a bit tho.

Really? I took maybe 3-4 shots at 6400 on my 18mpix, it's horrible. 3200 is ok if it's not pitch black around me.

It's almost the same difference when you compare FF bodies, again the Nikon is miles ahead with the last gen sensors. 6D isn't bad at all and the higher end 5D is actually worse then 6D, FFS.

That's very nice. And it's a really old body right now, Canon needs to get their **** together. I can't wait to see D500 stuff. EDIT: Looked at a few more images, seems like the 6400 on D7100 is a bit better then 3200 on my T2i. Oh well.

6400 on D7200 (haven't seen 7100) is definitely more then usable, and the only Canon APS-C that can do 6400 usable is 7D markII IMHO, and it's still worse. :(

We all would but.. that's more of a Sony A7S II territory I'm affraid.

Yes! I agree! Nikon is a good example of MPIX going up along with high ISO performance but Canon has been slacking in that department for 5 years now so that's why I'm worried. If 80D doesn't outperform 7D markII in high ISO, or let's say.. it does about the same.. then 24mpix over 20mpix...

The only thing that would get me to consider 80D rather then 7D markII is better high ISO performance, and I'm not holding my breath since they went up in megapixel count which usually makes the high ISO performance worse (all other things being equal). The 750D/760D (T6i/T6s) use a 24mpix...

I'm in the same boat but 7d markII still seems like a better choice to me, but I'll probably pick the one that does better in high ISO (which will still likely be the 7d markII). If they're about the same, I'd get the 80D because of the higher resolution. Then again.. I'd like to have the...

Video.

It costs the same here. Writing same things 3 times seems normal for this thread. Also, 2 out of 3 lenses I own aren't for full frame anyways. It's actually cheaper then.

It's about the same here, irrelevant since full frame is a disadvantage for the type of work that I do in 70-80% of the situations.

No, it wouldn't be better for me, 7D markII would be better for me. Are you reading what people are writing? Do you not understand it?

..and this is what a lot of people don't understand. They use a APS-C body with the 18-55 kit lens for a year, then buy a FF body with a few high-end lenses and are blown away by the difference even if they have no idea what they're doing. Obvious conclusion is - APS-C sux. D'oh.