better upgrade?

[JacaRanda]

Not sure I've seen the "newer" Tamron version.. any links?

 

[Derrel]

No idea and it may depend on what you shoot most often. Not sure how well your Sigma performs, but you have the range covered already. The jump from 70D to 5Dmkiii is a significant jump imo, so I would go for the 5Dmkiii.

It's interesting how this is how the thread started off, because I agree: it might very well depend on what you shoot most often, or what is most important to you. In this thread 70D was described as an outstanding camera body, and it is in terms of its feature set, but I'm familiar with its main limitation: noisy images at even moderately higher ISO settings. It'snot what I would call outstanding by today's industry-leading sensors whenever an ISO of 640 or 800 is called for...its images suffer at that ISO level. Compare it against the Canon 6D for low-light and higher ISO uses, or against the 5D-III.

The other issue is the crop-body's impact on lenses...if you're NOT using Canon EF-S or third-party lenses designed for APS-C cameras, then every lens you put on is being used as something that it is not. Your 24-105-L has IS and USM focus, and is a wide-angle, moderate wide-angle, semi-wide, normal, short tele, and medium telephoto lens--when used on a full-frame camera. The 85mm prime you might want: on APS-C, a full-length portrait of a man and woman forces you to be 34.5 feet back, but on a full-frame the SAME field of view is captured from 20 feet away.

To me, the body is the foundation. The body is what every,single lens is mounted to...and with a frame that's, what is it? 2.7 times larger in area? the full-frame body is the single largest determinant of how you shoot, and where you stand, with EVERYsingle lens put on it. And, with the larger sensor area, you need far less image magnification to create every,single size of image that you will output; that in itself tremendously reduces the necessity for high-performance optics. The bigger, beefier image to begin with brings a lot of advantage to the shooting situation. Bigger has benefits many times.

So...if you need higher ISO capability, almost any FF camera blows the 70D away, easily. If you want a 24-105 to be what it was designed to be, FF does that. If you want an 85mm lens that can be used indoors in a normal-sized room, FF does that. If you do not need high-performance body, the Canon 6D seems like a no-brainer to me. Not the 5D or 5D-II or III, but something like a refurb 6D and then the 70-200 f/4-L IS USM. Best of both worlds.

 

[gsgary]

I'm so glad I have given up on digital after reading this thread when people talk about waiting for the upgrade to the 5D mk3 what do you do when the new camera comes out ? Wait until that is upgraded

 

[Punisher911]

I'm so glad I have given up on digital after reading this thread when people talk about waiting for the upgrade to the 5D mk3 what do you do when the new camera comes out ? Wait until that is upgraded

Uhm, what? Never said the need to jump on the newest thing bandwagon and upgrade every time the new model comes out. My biggest question was between an upper model FF camera upgrade from my crop sensor or to buy a good lens instead. The mkiii has been out for a few years, I only mentioned that I can hold off on upgrading my crop sensor camera to a mk3 when the newer will be out soon enough.

 

[gsgary]

I'm so glad I have given up on digital after reading this thread when people talk about waiting for the upgrade to the 5D mk3 what do you do when the new camera comes out ? Wait until that is upgraded

Uhm, what? Never said the need to jump on the newest thing bandwagon and upgrade every time the new model comes out. My biggest question was between an upper model FF camera upgrade from my crop sensor or to buy a good lens instead. The mkiii has been out for a few years, I only mentioned that I can hold off on upgrading my crop sensor camera to a mk3 when the newer will be out soon enough.

I didn't mean you, this is all you bloody hear on hear, wait for the upgrade, crop sensors are rubbish full frame is best and so on

 

[Punisher911]

Okee dokee. I'll buy that.

 

[JacaRanda]

No idea and it may depend on what you shoot most often. Not sure how well your Sigma performs, but you have the range covered already. The jump from 70D to 5Dmkiii is a significant jump imo, so I would go for the 5Dmkiii.

It's interesting how this is how the thread started off, because I agree: it might very well depend on what you shoot most often, or what is most important to you. In this thread 70D was described as an outstanding camera body, and it is in terms of its feature set, but I'm familiar with its main limitation: noisy images at even moderately higher ISO settings. It'snot what I would call outstanding by today's industry-leading sensors whenever an ISO of 640 or 800 is called for...its images suffer at that ISO level. Compare it against the Canon 6D for low-light and higher ISO uses, or against the 5D-III.

The other issue is the crop-body's impact on lenses...if you're NOT using Canon EF-S or third-party lenses designed for APS-C cameras, then every lens you put on is being used as something that it is not. Your 24-105-L has IS and USM focus, and is a wide-angle, moderate wide-angle, semi-wide, normal, short tele, and medium telephoto lens--when used on a full-frame camera. The 85mm prime you might want: on APS-C, a full-length portrait of a man and woman forces you to be 34.5 feet back, but on a full-frame the SAME field of view is captured from 20 feet away.

To me, the body is the foundation. The body is what every,single lens is mounted to...and with a frame that's, what is it? 2.7 times larger in area? the full-frame body is the single largest determinant of how you shoot, and where you stand, with EVERYsingle lens put on it. And, with the larger sensor area, you need far less image magnification to create every,single size of image that you will output; that in itself tremendously reduces the necessity for high-performance optics. The bigger, beefier image to begin with brings a lot of advantage to the shooting situation. Bigger has benefits many times.

So...if you need higher ISO capability, almost any FF camera blows the 70D away, easily. If you want a 24-105 to be what it was designed to be, FF does that. If you want an 85mm lens that can be used indoors in a normal-sized room, FF does that. If you do not need high-performance body, the Canon 6D seems like a no-brainer to me. Not the 5D or 5D-II or III, but something like a refurb 6D and then the 70-200 f/4-L IS USM. Best of both worlds.

Very well said. The technology seems to have gotten so good in each area, that it's probably more important to think of what the use will be as opposed to other factors. Like I said, I have read so many times what a difference a FF frame camera does in comparison to APS-C so many times that I am convinced without ever having used one myself.

Even the OP has concerns about indoor space. Everything should be considered imo.

 

[sabbath999]

I didn't mean you, this is all you bloody hear on hear, wait for the upgrade, crop sensors are rubbish full frame is best and so on

I agree!

The EOS-1N I was shooting last night has the same exact resolution and image quality as any 35mm camera manufactured 25 years later (not that there are many of those left).

Funny thing is everybody thinks I am shooting digi when am using my EOS-1N or my Nikon F5... but everybody thinks I am shooting film when I break out my Nikon DF or Fuji X100T. Makes me chuckle.

 

[JacaRanda]

I'm so glad I have given up on digital after reading this thread when people talk about waiting for the upgrade to the 5D mk3 what do you do when the new camera comes out ? Wait until that is upgraded

Uhm, what? Never said the need to jump on the newest thing bandwagon and upgrade every time the new model comes out. My biggest question was between an upper model FF camera upgrade from my crop sensor or to buy a good lens instead. The mkiii has been out for a few years, I only mentioned that I can hold off on upgrading my crop sensor camera to a mk3 when the newer will be out soon enough.

I didn't mean you, this is all you bloody hear on hear, wait for the upgrade, crop sensors are rubbish full frame is best and so on

To the point that where, how, when, and what in terms of usage, don't seem to matter. But shouldn't they matter?

 

[gsgary]

I didn't mean you, this is all you bloody hear on hear, wait for the upgrade, crop sensors are rubbish full frame is best and so on

I agree!

The EOS-1N I was shooting last night has the same exact resolution and image quality as any 35mm camera manufactured 25 years later (not that there are many of those left).

Funny thing is everybody thinks I am shooting digi when am using my EOS-1N or my Nikon F5... but everybody thinks I am shooting film when I break out my Nikon DF or Fuji X100T. Makes me chuckle.

People alway come up to me and ask to see the screen on my M4P I tell them it's not even got a lightmeter

 

[Punisher911]

I am definitely not disappointed with the quality of my 70D or it's work, but I know that FF will provide a usable higher ISO advantage. My concern with using the 70-200 as an indoor portrait lens was the distance required for me to be back away from the subject with the crop factor on my 70D. So that's why I was wondering what would provide the better impact/usage to my current state between the two... Would the FF be more advantageous, or would getting the great lens make a more noticeable improvement...

 

[astroNikon]

I didn't mean you, this is all you bloody hear on hear, wait for the upgrade, crop sensors are rubbish full frame is best and so on

I'm waiting for the Nikon d799 which should be released in 2045 with the Extended 3D UHD FF micro-sensor and 75 fps spinning mirror. ( <-- sarcasm on waiting for the latest and greatest )

If you have need for the camera "now" then there's no reason to wait.
The newer camera will be more expensive though may help push down the 5dmk3 price a bit more.

 

[gsgary]

I didn't mean you, this is all you bloody hear on hear, wait for the upgrade, crop sensors are rubbish full frame is best and so on

I'm waiting for the Nikon d799 which should be released in 2045 with the Extended 3D UHD FF micro-sensor and 75 fps spinning mirror. ( <-- sarcasm on waiting for the latest and greatest )

If you have need for the camera "now" then there's no reason to wait.
The newer camera will be more expensive though may help push down the 5dmk3 price a bit more.

I'm waiting for my rewards from Film Ferrania and then all the new film they will be coming out with

 

[JacaRanda]

I am definitely not disappointed with the quality of my 70D or it's work, but I know that FF will provide a usable higher ISO advantage. My concern with using the 70-200 as an indoor portrait lens was the distance required for me to be back away from the subject with the crop factor on my 70D. So that's why I was wondering what would provide the better impact/usage to my current state between the two... Would the FF be more advantageous, or would getting the great lens make a more noticeable improvement...

No advantage if you don't have the room for the shot in regards to portraits (which you mentioned first). Would the lack of space cost you clients/money? Live bands? How much light/indoors/outdoors, and how close will you be to the stage? Things you have to consider I think.

 

[Punisher911]

I guess in reality, I will end up with both.. A FF body and the 70-200. Maybe the better question is which is a better first purchase....