80D a better choice than the 6D mk2?

[jakechris]

Here I sit, with enough money to buy the 6D mk2 and perhaps a 50mm 1.2 lens to start with. However with all of the recent negative reviews I've seen of the 6D mk2 regarding ISO noise and dynamic range, would the 80D be a better choice?

I would be focusing on the areas I know I could profit off of, portraits, graduations, weddings, baby pics and some real estate. Full frame cameras are suppose to benefit in areas where the 6D appears to be lacking (ISO/DR) vs the 80D, and for a grand less, I could buy an extra lens, so it really comes down to whether the 6D mk2 can excel in the areas it's supposed to.

I'd much rather go full frame IF those benefits are going to be obvious, but if it's negligible, perhaps I can start with the 80D and make it my 2nd camera later when a much better option presents itself.

Thoughts?

 

[benhasajeep]

Why not go Nikon and get more for less money? The D810 is much better than anything Canon is putting out at the moment picture quality wise. The D610 at about $1000 less than the D810 is just as capable image wise. But fewer buttons / controls. For picture quality wise, I don't think anything is a better deal money wise at the moment than the D610.

I don't know the 6D mkII but full frame should be good in ISO. Crop sensors like the D80, are in the middle of sensor ISO performance. The D80 scores lower in ISO performance than any of Nikons current DSLR's including their entry level D3400!

 

[jakechris]

Honestly, don't know jack about Nikon lol, I know that Canon glass is great for weddings and portraits, which is why I've always considered it.

 

[Derrel]

Honestly, don't know jack about Nikon lol, I know that Canon glass is great for weddings and portraits, which is why I've always considered it.

Yeah, Canon glass is good for weddings. Nikon glass is absolute $h!+_. All of it. All 80-plus lenses.

Between the 80D and the 6D Mark II...my preference is for the full-frame sensor, just for the way it leverages the many already-exisiting lenses: 16-35,17-40,24-70,24-105,50mm/1.4, 85mm/1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 100mm f/2, 135/2-L, 200/2.8 prime pipe, 70-200 both f/4 and f/2.8 models, 35/2, 35/1.4-L, and so on. On full-frame there are simply MORE native lenses available than there are for APS-C.

 

[goodguy]

Honestly, don't know jack about Nikon lol, I know that Canon glass is great for weddings and portraits, which is why I've always considered it.

If you want to shoot weddings or other pro stuff I strongly believe you need a dual memory card slot camera, in Canon word that's the 5DIII or 5DIV which are both good cameras and I would choose the MkIV if you can afford it or the MkIII if you cant.
Another option is Nikon, D610, D750, D800 and D810 all have dual memory cards.
So to your question, I wouldn't go with either the 6DII or the 80D for what you want.
Either Canon 5DIII/5DIV or full frame Nikon (All have dual memory card)

Now for the nonsense about Nikon lenses, Nikon has about same lenses as Canon has, they are about same prices, on top of that you have third party lenses like Sigma and Tamron which make lenses which are as good and many time BETTER then both Nikon and Canon so I wouldn't put lenses as a reason to go Nikon or Canon.

 

[jaomul]

Didn't even know the 6d2 was out yet. Do the reviews say it's poor. Ah well, I'm sure the many who buy one will get lovely photos with it anyway.

The 80d probably not quite as good, but a good photographer could easily do a wedding with an 80d, the correct lenses and knowledge. It probably goes without saying that a fullframe would make getting usable files easier in lower light.

Wouldn't try to sway you Nikon direction, but saying their lenses aren't great is inaccurate at the very least. I would actually questions the 50 f1.2, a very specialist lens that may or may not suit you (and without being condescending, because everyone starts somewhere, but if your asking this question on a forum you likely have relatively little experience) as it main advantage is at aperture with hairline depths of field.

If Nikon lenses aren't good enough, many prefer the new glut of super performance third party options from sigma and tamron

 

[beagle100]

Why not go Nikon and get more for less money? The D810 is much better than anything Canon is putting out at the moment picture quality wise. The D610 at about $1000 less than the D810 is just as capable image wise. But fewer buttons / controls. For picture quality wise, I don't think anything is a better deal money wise at the moment than the D610.

I don't know the 6D mkII but full frame should be good in ISO. Crop sensors like the D80, are in the middle of sensor ISO performance. The D80 scores lower in ISO performance than any of Nikons current DSLR's including their entry level D3400!

I agree, Canon is better than Nikon for "IQ" image quality, lens selection, sharpness, etc. but the 80D vs full frame Canon 6D question .... depends. Do you shoot sports? indoor weddings?

 

[jaomul]

Why not go Nikon and get more for less money? The D810 is much better than anything Canon is putting out at the moment picture quality wise. The D610 at about $1000 less than the D810 is just as capable image wise. But fewer buttons / controls. For picture quality wise, I don't think anything is a better deal money wise at the moment than the D610.

I don't know the 6D mkII but full frame should be good in ISO. Crop sensors like the D80, are in the middle of sensor ISO performance. The D80 scores lower in ISO performance than any of Nikons current DSLR's including their entry level D3400!

I agree, Canon is better than Nikon for "IQ" image quality, lens selection, sharpness, etc. but the 80D vs full frame Canon 6D question .... depends. Do you shoot sports? indoor weddings?

Really? Sony, Nikon, Canon ,Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax- is there really any that are without question better? I'd doubt it. They all have strengths and weaknesses, some better than others for some things, but taking sensor size (physics) into consideration, they all have excellent image quality imo

 

[beagle100]

/ controls. For picture quality wise, I don't think anything is a better deal money wise at the moment than the D
I don't know the 6D mkII but full frame should be good in ISO. Crop sensors like the D80, are in the middle of sensor ISO performance. The D80 scores lower in ISO performance than any of Nikons current DSLR's including their entry level D3400!

I agree, Canon is better than Nikon for "IQ" image quality, lens selection, sharpness, etc. but the 80D vs full frame Canon 6D question .... depends. Do you shoot sports? indoor weddings?

Really? Sony, Nikon, Canon ,Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax- is there really any that are without question better? I'd doubt it. They all have strengths and weaknesses, some better than others for some things, but taking sensor size (physics) into consideration, they all have excellent image quality imo

right, they're all excellent and above average. All the camera 'systems' have better lens, better lens selection and cheaper lens. And they have better "IQ" image quality and better ISO performance. it's simple physics - great. it's huge .... (except mirrorless)
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[jaomul]

/ controls. For picture quality wise, I don't think anything is a better deal money wise at the moment than the D
I don't know the 6D mkII but full frame should be good in ISO. Crop sensors like the D80, are in the middle of sensor ISO performance. The D80 scores lower in ISO performance than any of Nikons current DSLR's including their entry level D3400!

I agree, Canon is better than Nikon for "IQ" image quality, lens selection, sharpness, etc. but the 80D vs full frame Canon 6D question .... depends. Do you shoot sports? indoor weddings?

Really? Sony, Nikon, Canon ,Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax- is there really any that are without question better? I'd doubt it. They all have strengths and weaknesses, some better than others for some things, but taking sensor size (physics) into consideration, they all have excellent image quality imo

right, they're all above average. All the camera 'systems' have better lens, better lens selection and cheaper lens. And they have better "IQ" image quality and better ISO performance. it's simple physics - great. it's huge ....
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

I'm sure I missed something along the way in this thread. Anyway that is normal enough for me

 

[benhasajeep]

I agree, Canon is significantly better than Nikon for "IQ" image quality, lens selection, sharpness, etc. but the 80D vs full frame Canon 6D question .... depends. Do you shoot sports? indoor weddings?

HUH???

You need to Visit DXO. Not only is that statement not true about the bodies. It's not true about lenses either! In IQ performance that is!!! Matter of fact the best tested lens was a Sigma 85mm f/1.4 Art on a D800E. Was rated #1. That lens in Canon set up tested at #12 on a Canon 5DS R. A camera that's $1,000 more and a year newer than the Nikon!

Canon may have had a lead in DSLR and Lenses in years past. But not any longer. The top 31 lenses tested were neither Nikon OR Canon. Sigma, Zeiss, Sony, and 1 Tamron! Nikon beat out Canon with it's first lens at #32. Canon came in with it's first at #51! This is only IQ. Not build, feel, longevity, af speed, etc. Just IQ!

 

[beagle100]

I agree, Canon is significantly better than Nikon for "IQ" image quality, lens selection, sharpness, etc. but the 80D vs full frame Canon 6D question .... depends. Do you shoot sports? indoor weddings?

HUH???


Canon may have had a lead in DSLR and Lenses in years past. But not any longer. The top 31 lenses tested were neither Nikon OR Canon. Sigma, Zeiss, Sony, and 1 Tamron! Nikon beat out Canon with it's first lens at #32. Canon came in with it's first at #51! This is only IQ. Not build, feel, longevity, af speed, etc. Just IQ!

huh... ??
there is a reason most pros shoot with Canon
(and mirrorless cameras are smaller and lighter)

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[beagle100]

/ controls. For picture quality wise, I don't think anything is a better deal money wise at the moment than the D
I don't know the 6D mkII but full frame should be good in ISO. Crop sensors like the D80, are in the middle of sensor ISO performance. The D80 scores lower in ISO performance than any of Nikons current DSLR's including their entry level D3400!

I agree, Canon is better than Nikon for "IQ" image quality, lens selection, sharpness, etc. but the 80D vs full frame Canon 6D question .... depends. Do you shoot sports? indoor weddings?

Rage quality imo

right, they're all above average. All the camera 'systems' have better lens, better lens selection and cheaper lens. And they have better "IQ" image quality and better ISO performance. it's simple physics - great. it's huge ....
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

I'm sure I missed something along the way in this thread. Anyway that is normal enough for me

maybe you missed "Canon 6D and 80D" !
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[jaomul]

Maybe some here think they know it all

 

[beagle100]

Maybe some here think they know it all

apparently so !
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless