# Not Another 6D vs 7DMKII Thread? well..... :D



## meywd (Oct 17, 2014)

First, i am not a pro, I have the 600D and planing on getting both of the 7DMKII and the 6D - when the cash available  - for birds, action, astro, landscape, portraits, night and weddings\events photography.

I am still at 36K shots with mine, but am planning to keep it as a backup to the 7DMKII, i started trying to shoot birds recently when i got the 100-400, and once tried doing it with the 70-200, yeah AF is not that good for BIF, and even birds on trees, when there is a busy background the AF goes hunting too much, but i know that's the outcome of AI Servo and a small bird 

I have two options, get the 7DMKII or the 6D first - i wish i can get both at once, yup self proclaimed GAS, and photography is only part of it  - the thing is i can get both but i need a bunch of lenses with the 6D, as you can see in the sig, i don't have a FF wide lens, so a 24-70 f4 IS is duo with the 6D, also for astro i will get the samyang 14mm f2.8 and 24mm f1.4, i am still at milky way level, but that's enough for me now.

So, the question is, which to get first? we are going into winter so astro photography here will be on hold until april - as no milky way, and very cold weather in the desert - and for birds the season of migration is ending if not ended, but those are not the only factors, night events\weddings\portraits is a main reason to get the 6D, i have a flash, but that's not always an option, also landscape is an interest for me and wide lenses are not really wide with crop sensors.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 17, 2014)

And _*none*_ of the other threads on this site were about this topic?

Ok, here is your answer: Research both models and choose the one you can afford and you feel will suit your individual photography style. 

What works for another photographer may not work for you. So unless you can find a photographer exactly like you, the value of different photographer's opinions may not be as high as you think.

Good luck with your decision, but it is really up to you to conduct the research as only you know your budget and photographic style.


----------



## meywd (Oct 17, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> And _*none*_ of the other threads on this site were about this topic?
> 
> Ok, here is your answer: Research both models and choose the one you can afford and you feel will suit your individual photography style.
> 
> ...



Thank you for taking the time to reply, your correct i am the one who needs to decide, however i did research and was planning on getting the original 7D 2 years ago, but the budget made the 600D the choice at the time, and i think that was good, i learned a lot during that period and now i am more ready for a more advance body such as the 7DMKII, as for the 6D, High ISO is the main reason to get it, i want a clean picture at ISO 6400, and even though the 7DMKII seems to be a lot better than my 600D, with 30s exposure the noise will mostly still be an issue.


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 17, 2014)

6D first. You will still have the 600D, so you won't losing any focal length flexibility, and F4 lenses work much better on FF. Unless the birding shots outnumber your night events/portraits/wedding shots, getting the 6D first makes a lot more sense.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 17, 2014)

6D.

You will then realise the 'limitations' of crop cameras (for pixel peepers and big printers) and realise you *need* a 6D and 5D MkIII, mind you, by the time you have the 5D MkIII money saved you will be in used 1DX territory money wise.........

GAS is a rarely tamed affliction.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 17, 2014)

My first reaction was: Sounds like you should buy a 5D.

With a 6D you get half the features of a 5D. With a 7D you'll get another half of the features of the 5D. Why not save yourself some money in the long run and just get a 5D to begin with?


----------



## heptagon (Oct 17, 2014)

Joining the bandwagon: 6D first.

a) buy it with the 24-105 kit, to get a cheap and useful zoom, b) buy the tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC to get a good versatile zoom for a reasonable price, or c) buy the canon 24-70 f/2.8 II if you want to go expensive.

The 7DII isn't even out yet and the focusing system ist the only big advantage.


----------



## meywd (Oct 17, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> 6D first. You will still have the 600D, so you won't losing any focal length flexibility, and F4 lenses work much better on FF. Unless the birding shots outnumber your night events/portraits/wedding shots, getting the 6D first makes a lot more sense.


 


privatebydesign said:


> 6D.
> 
> You will then realise the 'limitations' of crop cameras (for pixel peepers and big printers) and realise you *need* a 6D and 5D MkIII, mind you, by the time you have the 5D MkIII money saved you will be in used 1DX territory money wise.........
> 
> GAS is a rarely tamed affliction.





heptagon said:


> Joining the bandwagon: 6D first.
> 
> a) buy it with the 24-105 kit, to get a cheap and useful zoom, b) buy the tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC to get a good versatile zoom for a reasonable price, or c) buy the canon 24-70 f/2.8 II if you want to go expensive.
> 
> The 7DII isn't even out yet and the focusing system ist the only big advantage.



I am leaning toward that choice, with a refurbished 6D at $1500.

as for 24-70, maybe that needs another thread, but from a quick research i get that the 24-70 f4 IS is second only to the 24-70 f2.8 II in sharpness, also IS is helpful as my hands are not steady, and at $1k its at half the price, yes f2.8 is very tempting, but that's pushing the wallet too much  



unfocused said:


> My first reaction was: Sounds like you should buy a 5D.
> 
> With a 6D you get half the features of a 5D. With a 7D you'll get another half of the features of the 5D. Why not save yourself some money in the long run and just get a 5D to begin with?



I thought about the 5D, it is a cheaper option when you include all the accessories you need with a body(grip/batteries) but what makes me lean toward the two bodies are the following:


The 5D is the jack of all trades master of none, yes its a great camera but the 6D has better low light performance, and the 7D has better AF - I hope - and drive with 10fps.
Having two bodies allows more opportunities, not having to switch lens, covering a longer focal range.
Plus with the 5D i will need a 600mm lens which is out of budget


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 17, 2014)

meywd said:


> I am leaning toward that choice, with a refurbished 6D at $1500.
> 
> as for 24-70, maybe that needs another thread, but from a quick research i get that the 24-70 f4 IS is second only to the 24-70 f2.8 II in sharpness, also IS is helpful as my hands are not steady, and at $1k its at half the price, yes f2.8 is very tempting, but that's pushing the wallet too much



If you have your heart set on the 24-70 f/4 IS, you could considering getting a white box grey market lens for 800. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=11702

You can also get a brand new 6D for 1440 from an authorized dealer using CPW's streetprice:
http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/04039/Canon-EOS-6D-price.html


----------



## candc (Oct 17, 2014)

If you get the 6d you don't have to get a 24-70. Maybe the 16-35 f/4 plus your 50 and your 70-200 makes a great kit?


----------



## meywd (Oct 17, 2014)

Random Orbits said:


> meywd said:
> 
> 
> > I am leaning toward that choice, with a refurbished 6D at $1500.
> ...



Thanks 



candc said:


> If you get the 6d you don't have to get a 24-70. Maybe the 16-35 f/4 plus your 50 and your 70-200 makes a great kit?



well, i thought about the 16-35 f4 but with the samyang 14mm f2.8 and 24mm f1.4 i thought a 24-70 covers a more needed focal length specially for events.


----------



## smithcon (Oct 17, 2014)

As somebody who owns a 7D (since it came out in 2009) and a 6D (for 6 months), I can say that I like having the two bodies. The 6D has taken over all of my photography except for sports, bif, and aviation/airshow in-flight shots. I am planning on upgrading the 7D to the Mark II as sports are a big part of what I do.

In your situation, I would probably get the 6D first, unless your interests lean much more strongly to sports, bif, or focal-length constrained distance shooting.

Note that occasionally the 6D comes up on a refurb deal from Canon for under $1300. That is how I got mine, and it was perfect; completely indistinguishable from new, and Canon backs them with the same full warranty a new camera comes with.

I was worried about FF lenses, and still haven't completely solved that issue. I have the excellent Rokinon 14 2.8 which I bought on a deal, and I have the wonderful pre-art Sigma 50 1.4 EX (this lens is underrated -- it has great sharpness and the quality of Bokeh it yields is absolutely beautiful) which I used as a portrait lens on my 7D before the 6D arrived and stole the portrait shooting away and took over the 50 as a great walk-around lens. I also everything I need in the 70+ end, but nothing in-between the 14 and the 50. I've been filling in by renting occasional lenses at ProPhotoSupply in Portland, OR, where I can rent even the 24-70 2.8 II for $30 from Thursday evening through Monday morning (I'm lucky to live quite close to them). I've been eyeing the Cameda Camera deal on the 7D Mark II, which comes with the 24-70 f4 IS, but lacking a Canadian address, I'm not sure if I should try to go through with it.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 17, 2014)

To the 5D-III punters... I can understand how the 5D-III can replace the 6D, but how exactly does the 5D-III replace a 7D-II?


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 17, 2014)

StudentOfLight said:


> To the 5D-III punters... I can understand how the 5D-III can replace the 6D, but how exactly does the 5D-III replace a 7D-II?



Apart from fps what doesn't the 5D MkIII do that the 7D MkII can?


----------



## fragilesi (Oct 17, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > To the 5D-III punters... I can understand how the 5D-III can replace the 6D, but how exactly does the 5D-III replace a 7D-II?
> ...



That fluttering light thing?


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 17, 2014)

fragilesi said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > StudentOfLight said:
> ...



Is that it?


----------



## fragilesi (Oct 17, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> fragilesi said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



I wouldn't know, I don't have either but both of them would be important things to me.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 17, 2014)

fragilesi said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > fragilesi said:
> ...



I don't have either, either, and won't be getting either. But I am surprised that those two things are the only things that anyone can think of. 

Whilst I won't belittle those two features for those that do *need* them, I can't help but feel most of us don't!


----------



## fragilesi (Oct 17, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> I don't have either, either, and won't be getting either. But I am surprised that those two things are the only things that anyone can think of.
> 
> Whilst I won't belittle those two features for those that do *need* them, I can't help but feel most of us don't!



What an odd conclusion. You mentioned one, I mentioned another. It sounds like neither of us has bothered to do a comparison, I certainly haven't. Once people get their hands on a 7dII we'll probably get a better idea of what it can do.

One thing it would also do is to allow me to spend an additional grand on a new lens for a start.


----------



## tron (Oct 17, 2014)

The following is my kind of summing up the pros and cons:

birds: 7DII unless in very low light conditions in which case 5DIII

action: 7DII or 5DIII depending whether you are focal length limited or not

astro: 6D maybe a little but how much less noisier is it? 

landscape: 6D,5DIII 

portraits: 5DIII (the AF system for off center focusing in an eye beats 6D) 

night and weddings\events photography: 6D,5DIII practically equal

I do have a 5DIII and after I sold my 5DII I was thinking about a 6D until I thought:

1. I will always try to decide which camera with which lens. Since you are thinking 2 different
type of cameras (1 FF, 1 APS-C) you will possibly do not have such dilemmas

2. It is nice for both cameras to be exactly the same in handling/buttons/menus/capabilities

But maybe apart from an addon in the joystick in 7DII I guess handling will be the same.

Still I didn't regret my 2nd 5DIII. I believe that no matter what you choose, you will enjoy your new camera(s).


----------



## Steve (Oct 17, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> I don't have either, either, and won't be getting either. But I am surprised that those two things are the only things that anyone can think of.
> 
> Whilst I won't belittle those two features for those that do *need* them, I can't help but feel most of us don't!



Well, the better AF system with ITR, -3EV center point and 65 cross type points over like 50% of the sensor might be considered an advantage by some! I agree, though - unless you primarily shoot action (and can't afford a 1DX) the 5D3 or 6D is probably better for most people.


----------



## LesC (Oct 17, 2014)

6D first - the 7DMKII price is bound to drop after it's been out a while & you'll also have the benefit of user reviews just in case there are any problems with it...


----------



## Quasimodo (Oct 17, 2014)

Is a hammer better than a saw? Should I get a hammer or a saw, or both? That is the question of the OP as I read it. Not the relative merits of a hammer and a saw. As the first reply in this thread indicated, only you can figure out whether you need to put in nails or make a piece into two in a good looking way..

As to you predicament. I had a similar predicament a couple of years ago. I was short on cash (for this sort of things) and I badly wanted the 135L, but also the 100L. While the one was the king of portrait, the other one could do portrait and macro... Well, I ended the dissonace by buying both


----------



## dtaylor (Oct 17, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> StudentOfLight said:
> 
> 
> > To the 5D-III punters... I can understand how the 5D-III can replace the 6D, but how exactly does the 5D-III replace a 7D-II?
> ...



iTR tracking, AF points over a wider area of the VF, and light flicker compensation. That and fps would certainly make the 7D2 the better choice for some sports situations, but the 5D3 is no slouch in those situations.

The 7D2 will also remote control Canon flashes. Not a big deal, there are plenty of equipment options to add this to the 5D3.


----------



## meywd (Oct 18, 2014)

smithcon said:


> As somebody who owns a 7D (since it came out in 2009) and a 6D (for 6 months), I can say that I like having the two bodies. The 6D has taken over all of my photography except for sports, bif, and aviation/airshow in-flight shots. I am planning on upgrading the 7D to the Mark II as sports are a big part of what I do.
> 
> In your situation, I would probably get the 6D first, unless your interests lean much more strongly to sports, bif, or focal-length constrained distance shooting.
> 
> ...





LesC said:


> 6D first - the 7DMKII price is bound to drop after it's been out a while & you'll also have the benefit of user reviews just in case there are any problems with it...



It would be great to get the 6D at that price, and yeah the 7DMKII price will probably drop after a while.



Quasimodo said:


> Is a hammer better than a saw? Should I get a hammer or a saw, or both? That is the question of the OP as I read it. Not the relative merits of a hammer and a saw. As the first reply in this thread indicated, only you can figure out whether you need to put in nails or make a piece into two in a good looking way..
> 
> As to you predicament. I had a similar predicament a couple of years ago. I was short on cash (for this sort of things) and I badly wanted the 135L, but also the 100L. While the one was the king of portrait, the other one could do portrait and macro... Well, I ended the dissonace by buying both



nice solution, I did the same when i got the 70-200L f4 and the 100 f2.8


----------



## tcmatthews (Oct 18, 2014)

I vote for the 6D as well. The 7D II will still be ISO limited compared to a full frame camera. For the 7D II you need to factor in the cost of CF cards to get the full benefit of the Camera. 

I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards. 

For general everyday use I would take a 6D any day over a 7D II. But I could use a high speed demon off a camera for birds. But given the coast I plan on renting one first. Then I will make my decision.


----------



## Old Sarge (Oct 18, 2014)

tcmatthews said:


> I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards.


Page 42 and pagev504of the 7D II manual mention using UHS 1 cards.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Oct 18, 2014)

In the field now with multiple cameras, crop and FF. I would not recommend a crop camera over FF camera for any use except tiny birds or to save money.

The 6D images are just aesthetically superior. Better color, noise, exposure, sharpness, contrast all combining for pleasing, smooth images.

The 6D center point is as good as any I've used from Canon.


----------



## meywd (Oct 18, 2014)

tcmatthews said:


> I vote for the 6D as well. The 7D II will still be ISO limited compared to a full frame camera. For the 7D II you need to factor in the cost of CF cards to get the full benefit of the Camera.
> 
> I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards.
> 
> For general everyday use I would take a 6D any day over a 7D II. But I could use a high speed demon off a camera for birds. But given the coast I plan on renting one first. Then I will make my decision.





MichaelHodges said:


> In the field now with multiple cameras, crop and FF. I would not recommend a crop camera over FF camera for any use except tiny birds or to save money.
> 
> The 6D images are just aesthetically superior. Better color, noise, exposure, sharpness, contrast all combining for pleasing, smooth images.
> 
> The 6D center point is as good as any I've used from Canon.



Thanks for your input, waiting for proper reviews of the 7DMKII is better i guess, before i got my 600D i was reading a lot on the 5D and 1D series for years, so i am really excited about having a FF camera.


----------



## meywd (Oct 18, 2014)

Old Sarge said:


> tcmatthews said:
> 
> 
> > I was checking the Canon USA website it looks like they only put in a standard speed SD card reader. There was no mention of a UHS-1 compatibility. I do not own CF cards. The 7D II may suffer the same performance issues at the 5D III when using SD cards.
> ...



from here it seem it does:



> the burning question in my mind was "Does the 7D Mark II support the most current SD spec (which is now UHS-II)?" And I was bummed to see that the SD slot is only UHS-I, once again showing that Canon is behind in their adoption of the newer standards.


----------



## meywd (Oct 18, 2014)

Steve said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > I don't have either, either, and won't be getting either. But I am surprised that those two things are the only things that anyone can think of.
> ...





dtaylor said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > StudentOfLight said:
> ...



For me, FPS, AF, reach and price are the main factors, i think that the proper replacement of 6D + 7DMKII in one body is the 1DX rather than the 5DMKIII, but of course the price is too high for me, i really consider getting the 5DMKIII, but with the reasons I stated before and a 5DMKIV looming ahead, i think its a better investment to get the 6D + 7DMKII, specially the 7DMKII since there will be mostly another 5 years of wait for a better one


----------



## LovePhotography (Oct 19, 2014)

6D. No question.
Looking at the 6D vs 7DII still life at ISO 100 there is no comparison. 6D is better.
In fact, comparing the 7DII vs the T5i still life at ISO 100, the T5i is very marginally better, for $1200 less mula.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM


----------



## candc (Oct 20, 2014)

LovePhotography said:


> 6D. No question.
> Looking at the 6D vs 7DII still life at ISO 100 there is no comparison. 6D is better.
> In fact, comparing the 7DII vs the T5i still life at ISO 100, the T5i is very marginally better, for $1200 less mula.
> http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM



You are right about the ir comparisons. The t5i still life 100 looks noticeably better than the 7dii or 70d, it also looks marginally better than the 6d. That seems peculiar, they are all in camera jpegs so I suspect there is some additional sharpening and contrast added in the t5i image?


----------



## wickidwombat (Oct 20, 2014)

candc said:


> If you get the 6d you don't have to get a 24-70. Maybe the 16-35 f/4 plus your 50 and your 70-200 makes a great kit?



i agree with this since you will be going for landscapes etc with the 6D 24mm isnt wide enough


----------



## meywd (Oct 21, 2014)

wickidwombat said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > If you get the 6d you don't have to get a 24-70. Maybe the 16-35 f/4 plus your 50 and your 70-200 makes a great kit?
> ...



Well as i mentioned before, i will mostly get the samyang 14 f/2.8 for astrophotography so, this might cover that, until a time comes when i feel that i need the 16-35 or a 14-24 is released


----------

