Moving up to full frame

reaper7534 · Sep 12, 2013

I plan on moving up to full frame by the end of the year mainly cause I do a lot of indoor photography and could use some better ISO performance than what I have. I currently have the 7D and from I can tell the only major differences is burst speed, AF points and construction in favor of the of the 7D. I only use center point AF.

Advantages of 6D

low light performance
full frame
GPS and wifi

I very rarely need to shoot off multiple shots in succession so fps isn't at the top of my list. I also only have one efs lens, a 10-22 which will be a easy sell. Any reason to choose a 5d III over a 6d for me, I'm just a enthusiast photographer who wants better low light performance.

kay1547 · Sep 12, 2013

from what i understand, the 5d III was targeted more toward video. maybe take a look at some nikon options, I tend to find people will give it a higher rating for images over video.
try this site, might help you choose ISO performance.

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

JacaRanda · Sep 12, 2013

Not sure where the info about 5d3 being geared towards video comes from.

Base on the information you gave, the 6d will do you fine and save you lots of dinero!

A couple of links to check out.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs-Canon-EOS-6D

http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/canon-6d-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii/

play18now · Sep 14, 2013

My two cents: The 6D is a fabulous camera, as it your 7D. You will definitely notice the low light performance compared to the 7D. Not really worth dumping a grand+ in lenses and accessories to switch to Nikon IMO, although I am a bit biased. I do think Nikon is probably making better bodies at the moment, but I'm not sure I would really notice the difference. The 5DMkIII is a better camera than the 6D for some things, such as low light sports photography, but unless you plan on shooting a lot at 4000 ISO and 1/1250th while still trying to capture incredible detail in fast bursts, you would probably be better served by the 6D and an extra $1500 in your wallet.

goodguy · Sep 14, 2013

I will make it simple ditch the 7D and run to get the 6D, a bloody good camera!

I cant wait for the moment I will own a full frame camera myself

For you the 5D will be an over kill, good luck.

grafxman · Sep 14, 2013

I bought a 6D because of its low light/high ISO performance. That's important to me because much of my photography is inside museums which are often dimly lit. I soon discovered that the selection of lenses for a full frame camera is mighty poor. I used the excellent and versatile Sigma 18-250mm macro on my 7D. That combination only had one problem which is that it doesn't like high ISO levels. Everything else about it was far superior to the 6D. I've been using Canon's 24-105mm with the 6D and every photo I take looks just a tiny bit soft. Other people have commented about this as well. The other lens I have is Tamron's 28-300mm macro. It doesn't like to focus in low light. I never had that problem with my Sigma 18-250mm macro on the 7D. I just got extremely noisy photos if the ISO went above 3200. My third lens is Sigma's excellent 12-24mm. However it's a wide angle special purpose lens of limited flexibility. If you really need high ISO performance then a full frame 6D or 5DIII is the way to go. Otherwise I haven't seen any advantage to going to full frame, at least not for me.

Gavjenks · Sep 14, 2013

reaper7534 said:
I plan on moving up to full frame by the end of the year mainly cause I do a lot of indoor photography and could use some better ISO performance than what I have. I currently have the 7D and from I can tell the only major differences is burst speed, AF points and construction in favor of the of the 7D. I only use center point AF.
[snip]
I very rarely need to shoot off multiple shots in succession so fps isn't at the top of my list. I also only have one efs lens, a 10-22 which will be a easy sell. Any reason to choose a 5d III over a 6d for me, I'm just a enthusiast photographer who wants better low light performance.

If you only use center AF points, then 6D is the best Canon camera for your needs (assuming you can't afford the 1DX of course). Not the best camera for your money, the best camera for you period.

The 6D outperforms the 5DIII in low light performance which yous ay you care about, while still costing half the price. The 5DIII on the other hand, outperforms in autofocus points, but since you only use the middle one, this doesn't matter to you. And a slight increase in FPS, which you said you also don't need.

Making the 6D your clear choice, I'd say, in both performance relevant to you AND cost.

Ilovemycam · Sep 14, 2013

Good for you! I'd like a Ff Fuji X if they made one. For low light use as you brought up. Leica Ff is nice, but it is jsut crazy priced. fuji is allmost a disposable cam.

gsgary · Sep 20, 2013

Alyssa04 said:
I think Cannon camera's are much better than other's. I only see Galaxy IV for its comparative of it as some features of it resemble to it. But they are no introducing the Wifi one as Samsung has done it. If anyone of you had learn about this then tell me.

Cannon dont make cameras Canon do

LoriStead · Oct 18, 2013

I have the 5D Mark III and it is amazing in low light situations. You have to go really high on the ISO for noise to even become an issue. This was important to me, as I am moving toward more b/w photography (which shows noise WAY more than color). Anyway, here is a helpful link: Canon EOS 5D Mark III low light ISO samples: dpreview review samples: Galleries: Digital Photography Review. It shows examples at different ISOs. Whatever you choose, enjoy it! Good luck!

Rocketman1978 · Oct 22, 2013

I don't have a lot of history with the 6D as it just arrived last week but MAN the ISO performance! WOW, absolutely stoked at how great it is in low light compared to my 7D. I concur with the person that said, RUN to the 7D, HA!