Is this upgrade worth it? (Canon)

[Thalion]

Hi

I currently have Eos 1100d/Rebel T3, and I have seen advertised Eos 750d/Rebel T6i at a nice price.

I am really on a budget, sort of shouldn't upgrade at all, but I really want to...

A few of the things I'm currently not happy about with 1100d;
It can't (I think) use a wireless remote
I think it's difficult to get sharp shots on a distance. Not that the pics are soft, more that they seem «muddy».
The screen doesn't flip out, it kills my neck when shooting down on the ground.

That's just what I could think of right now.

Any thoughts? Is this upgrade worth it?

 

[khakoo]

The 750D/T6i has a newer and better sensor than the 1100D/T3, so you might gain from superior image quality and improved performance at high ISO. When the 750D came out I think it was the best value for money in Canon's range, although personally I would spend the extra for the more upmarket ergonomics of the 760D/T6s. If you would really benefit from an articulated screen then that may be all the justification you need. However, if your other points contribute to your decision, note:

It can't (I think) use a wireless remote

The 1100D has a remote release port, which is a 2.5mm jack socket. This can be used either with a cable release, or readily available and inexpensive RF remotes.

I Ihink it's difficult to get sharp shots on a distance. Not that the pics are soft, more that they seem «muddy».

The 1100D is entry level, but still a perfectly fine camera. Poor results could be due to any of several causes, and possibly more than one; optics, settings, handholding technique, atmospheric conditions, and so on. In particular "muddy" makes me suspect processing choices. Are you shooting raw? What is your workflow? Can you post any samples so we can try to diagnose the problem?

 

[goodguy]

I will make this short

Is it worth upgrading from your current camera ?

YES!

 

[Overread]

It can't (I think) use a wireless remote
I think it's difficult to get sharp shots on a distance. Not that the pics are soft, more that they seem «muddy».
The screen doesn't flip out, it kills my neck when shooting down on the ground.

A few thoughts
1) As said there should be one on the market, but it might be 3rd party instead of Canon official brand. Official brand remotes can be rather more expensive than 3rd party, but there are many reliable 3rd party choices.

2) Sharp shot at distance is much more likely to be either lens related or user error than it is the camera. The sensor does play a part, but your camera shouldn't have any trouble there getting sharp shots. Post a photo or two up for review and we can help diagnose what is going on. A change in how you take photos could produce a huge improvement without any new kit (and if you do upgrade you'll get better performance on the new camera - similarly if its user error a newer camera won't fix the issue).
Check the "how to get feedback" link in my signature for further advice on posting for critique

3) Screen not flipping out is an issue for shooting low down, however you might find that a tripod or some other considerations could help here; although this is one area where a foldout screen can help.


It would also help to know a bit about what you like to take photos of,even see them. It might be that a tripod, new lens or other accessories could give you a much bigger improvement in image quality and what you can do instead of a new camera body.

 

[beagle100]

Hi

I currently have Eos 1100d/Rebel T3, and I have seen advertised Eos 750d/Rebel T6i at a nice price.

I am really on a budget, sort of shouldn't upgrade at all, but I really want to...
A few of the things I'm currently not happy about with 1100d;
It can't (I think) use a wireless remote
I think it's difficult to get sharp shots on a distance. Not that the pics are soft, more that they seem «muddy».
The screen doesn't flip out, it kills my neck when shooting down on the ground.
That's just what I could think of right now.
Any thoughts? Is this upgrade worth it?

maybe, what are your photo subjects? your current lens?
'sharp shots at a distance" usually requires a longer telephoto lens
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[Thalion]

Thank you all for your input. I'll try to answer the questions raised.

What do I like to take photos of? It mostly comes down to food, pets, objects and landscapes.
My camera is set to shoot both raw and jpeg, but I don't use the jpegs for anything. I use Lightroom to edit the raw files, and I will ususally do it in this order; lens correction, white balance, cropping, adjustments to exposure, colour, etc as I see needed, sharpening and in some cases noise reduction.
I do have a tripod, but I don't love to carry it around. I use it for objects and portraits.
I mostly use Sigma 17-50mm, and I also like Canon 50mm. I have a Tamron (I think) 70-200, or maybe 250. I don't like it... Then there's the kit lens, but unforunately it had a hard meeting with someone's head, and I don't quite trust it after that...

I know some of my issues may be down to my lenses. And obviously, as I am very much on a budget, my lenses are all cheap as well. But I am pleased with the results I get on close-ups, and rather close. (In other words; food, pets and objects) It's landscapes that unimpresses me. So I've found three photos taken with diffrent lenses, and all with ISO 100-160, and I have chosen them only for their muddyness. I have not edited them other than converting raw to jpeg, though I had to scales them down somewhat to be able to upload.

As for user errors, I am probably guilty of many. And all advices in that matter is also welcome.

July at 13:38 Eos 1100D, Canon 18-55mm (kit), f/9, 1/640sec, ISO-100, 18mm, Aperture priority

February at 11:59 Eos 100D, Sigma 17-50mm, f/7.1, 1/80sec, ISO-100, 17mm, Aperture priority

July at 21:41, Eos 1100D, Canon 50mm, f/7.1, 1/60sec, ISO-160, 50mm, Aperture priority

 

[Overread]

I had a quick look at one of the photos you think is muddy and found what I suspect is one of your issues:

If you look at the histogram you've got all the light very neatly in the middle. It's actually a very tight bunching too so it suggests the light was quite even and fairly easy to work with, no huge highlight spikes to worry about. However with digital its better to "expose to the right". That means ignoring the exposure meters desire to middle everything and instead exposing so that you gather the most amount of light data at the time of shooting. So in that case I would

1) Meter the shot and take as normal

2) On the back of the camera I'd review the shot with the histogram showing (check manual to show histogram during photo review)

3) There are lines on the histogram (on the camera) that gives you a rough idea how many stops you'd have before your furthest right part of the graph would hit the far right side of the chart (furthest right is full overexposure (white) and furthest left is full underexposure (black)).

4) Depending on your mode I would use manual mode and adjust a setting to let in more light (eg slower shutterspeed or higher ISO); or use exposure compensation (tells the camera to over/under expose the shot using the setting it controls).

5) Review the second shot and see how the histogram is, adjusting if required to over or under expose a little more.


This should resolve your muddy photo issue somewhat, it should also give you cleaner shots to work with since the more you expose to the right the more light data you get. This has the result of lowering the amount of noise present in the shot; even if you used a higher ISO.
A higher ISO that you don't have to brighten in editing gives you less noise than a lower ISO that you have to brighten in editing.

 

[Thalion]

Thank you, I will try this!

I do view the histogram now and then, but I guess I have just expected the metering to be correct and the scene simply to be dark... Also, I think I often find the camera's screen too bright.
Looking forwards to see if this will help.

 

[Overread]

The cameras meter aims for the middle range of exposure (casually called 50% grey though in reality the value varies between cameras somewhat and between manufacturers, but its roughly in the same ballpark). So given even light it will always expose aiming for the bulk of the light to be in the middle of the histogram.

This is why the histogram is so invaluable for review because it takes out the brightness of the screen itself and shows you the actual brightness values of the shot itself. Note that when you've got it enabled it will typically blink any overexposed areas on the photo. This means you can tell if you've blown out the whole sky or if its just one or two tiny specks that are not worth concern.

 

[zombiesniper]

To solve the screen brightness.

Take a photo where the histogram shows the lighter colours touching the far right. Then adjust your screen brightness to your liking. This needs to be done in the environment that you'll be shooting in.

 

[ronlane]

@Overread gave really good diagnosis of the issues. When I saw the images, my first thought was that these images just lack post processing. They do look underexposed and probably could use some dehaze (if you are using LR and/or PS).

 

[Thalion]

Whoa, this is one great community! I am overwhelmed by all the good advice.

Adjust the screen brightness on my camera.... never thought about that, I hope it's possible on mine.

Also, I hereby pledge myself to use the histogram much more often, and better. I sort of feel stupid, cause I can easily see that the photos are underexposed, and there are no good reasons why I didn't get it right in the first place. Other than 1) they looked ok on the camera screen, and 2) I am obviously afraid to over-expose.

And I'll use manual mode more. I was happily using aperture priority, but will try to take more control.

Can't wait for the weekend now.

 

[stk]

I gave your photos a quick run through Lightroom, but then I saw that you don't want your photos edited. Give me a sound if it's OK for me to post them. I went quite hard on the levers in an attempt to show you that they're not that muddy, and of course; I only had the JPEGs to work with.

 

[ronlane]

@Thalion, I think at one time or another we were all probably guilty of under exposing in the camera. I probably still do it too much if I were to be honest and look.

As with other things, the key is to take what you learn here and put it to use for you in the field.

 

[Thalion]

I gave your photos a quick run trough Lightroom, but then I saw that you don't want your photos edited. Give me a sound if it's OK for me to post them. I went quite hard on the levers in an attempt you that they're not that muddy, and of course; I only had the JPEGs to work with.

Go ahead. I'll update my settings about editing.