# Upgrade from 7D to 6D or MK3?



## timothetoad (Dec 2, 2012)

So I've had my Canon 7D for the past 2 or 3 years, and I've been pretty happy with it for video. 

The thing is, I want to upgrade my body to the next level: a full frame body.

Now that the 6D is out, I'm curious if it's worth the $1,000 price difference between the 6D and the 5D Mark 3. 

The Mark 3 has some unique features like a headphone jack, 100% view finder coverage, etc. 

I'm just not sure. I do have a budget though..


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 2, 2012)

timothetoad said:


> I'm just not sure. I do have a budget though..



For video & ef mount, neither the 5d3 or 6d are a smart budget choice if you have a look at the threads...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855879-REG/Blackmagic_Design_BMD_CINECAM26KEF_Cinema_Camera.html

For stills: What lenses (and other equipment like flashes) do you have, what do you shoot (or plan to), what's your budget in approx. $$$? Without these information a quick "drive-by" question like this is naive at best I'm sorry to say - how are we supposed to know if the added features of the 5d3 are helpful to you? 

But if you're on a budget (like me) and are not going pro or shooting sports the 5d3 probably is overkill. Read my 6d positive fact list if it helps: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11309.0


----------



## bluegreenturtle (Dec 2, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> timothetoad said:
> 
> 
> > I'm just not sure. I do have a budget though..
> ...


----------



## marv_b (Dec 2, 2012)

http://www.digitalrev.com/article/canon-eos-6d-hands-on/NTcwMDg0OTA_A
may be of interest to some


----------



## pwp (Dec 2, 2012)

If FF is not a "must-have" then it may only be a short wait for the 7DII. Personally I'd have a fully featured 7DII ahead of a stripped back 6D. If the budget is there, the 5DIII is certain to satisfy.

-PW


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 2, 2012)

pwp said:


> Personally I'd have a fully featured 7DII ahead of a stripped back 6D.


But a crop sensor has a much smaller (optical) viewfinder which is a reason on it's own to upgrade ... apart from full lens glass usage & 35mm field of view plus possible thinner depth of field.

I collected a list of things that aren't that bad after all on the 6d: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11309.0


----------



## JasonATL (Dec 2, 2012)

Based on the videos I've seen so far from the 6D, I'd say the extra $1,000 or so is worth it to avoid moire/aliasing. The 6D seems to have no better video quality than the 5D Mark II, especially with regard to moire/aliasing. Add to that the ability to monitor audio and I would say that the 5D3 is worth it, assuming you have the budget. Given the moire/aliasing on the 6D, then I think the key question for video is between the 5D Mark II and the 6D, if you can live with moire/aliasing. Is the 6D worth the extra few hundred? Having said that, when I used a 5D Mark II, it felt its age. Video was great. It just felt old in how it operated.

Look for deals that come up on e-bay or others from autorized retailers, as the 5D3 price is now reliably often in the $2800-$2900 range. 

Personally, I'm looking forward to the 7D replacement. I would love to have a crop-sensor body that doesn't have moire/aliasing issues and has improved low-light capability compared to the current crop sensor cams. While I like the 5D3 (the one I use is actually my wife's) - especially its almost nonexistent moire/aliasing and its low-light capability - I have found that I think I might actually prefer the crop sensor for video. The DoF is plenty shallow - and not too shallow, like the 5D3 can be sometimes. I actually still use my 600D/T3i quite a bit, even when my wife would let me use the 5D3.

If moire and aliasing don't bother you on your current 7D and the lack of headphone output isn't an issue for you, then I would say to get the 6D (or 5D Mark II, if you can find one) and spend extra on glass.


----------



## skitron (Dec 6, 2012)

The moire in 6D (production model) is actually a bit worse than 5D2 in a side by side comparison (along with 5D3) I saw online. Between that and no headphone jack, can't change the audio level while recording, plus the lesser AF for stills along with less FPS and less durability just about has me convinced to slap a return label on the 6D box when it arrives and just pony up for a 5D3...


----------



## Policar (Dec 6, 2012)

The 5D III falls far short of the BMC camera in terms of test charts and footage pushed far one way or the other, but you have to weight that against lens availability and how ridiculously easy it is to shoot and post with the Mark III. It's pretty darned good until it's directly in comparison with something better. For video I feel it is very underrated. If you do everything yourself and are very technical (you're either an amateur who shoots very little or a professional house that does studio stuff only) something like the BMC or Scarlet makes sense. But for ease of use and fast turn around times, the dSLRs are great.

The 5D also has darned nice color rendering. And FF lets you use a fast borderline UWA (24mm f1.4), whereas no 16mm f1.4 or 18mm f1.4 exists for APS-C. So for low light the 5D III is AMAZING.

Compared with the 6D I'd get the Mark III for sure--less aliasing, surely better low light, etc.

The 7D Mark II might be even better and you won't need to change lenses, though!


----------



## kdw75 (Dec 9, 2012)

I am in the same boat. I have wanted FF so badly, but I just can't justify paying so much for the MK3 when it is mainly a hobby for me. I refuse to buy EF-S lenses simply because I know I will upgrade at some point. I like doing landscapes as well as shooting family snapshots of the kids running around. My 7D works pretty good, but I keep wanting a wide angle lens. I have been looking at the 16-35L, but that is also a ton of money and if I had a FF camera my 24-70L would be just fine for me.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 9, 2012)

Policar said:


> Compared with the 6D I'd get the Mark III for sure--less aliasing, surely better low light, etc.



Uh? I think you've got that mixed up (or typo), the 6d has higher iso capability @iso12800+ and better low-light focusing @center point.


----------



## Kristofgss (Dec 9, 2012)

I'm in the same situation, but shooting stills. The reason I'm waiting to save up the extra money for the 5D3 instead of buying the 6D right now
- 100% viewfinder, I love this with the 7D as well, what you frame is what you get, no more cropping needed.
- Controls on both sides of the LCD for the 5D3. They are in pretty much the same location, so it's easy to swich between bodies and keep both. The 6D has no controls on the left
- The joystick on the 5D3, yes I know the 6D has the clickwheel thingy, but I love the joystick on the 7D
- focus points. The 7D is very good at tracking things and switching focus point to where you want it with the joystick, so I expect the same from an even more expensive body, not the reduced focus point set the 6D offers.

-I'd love to have the remote wifi shoot function, but on the other hand, how often is that really used? I got the 600D for the swivel screen as well, thinking it'd be great for odd-angle work, but I tend never to use it in practice, except for making the odd video of the kids school play.


----------



## verysimplejason (Dec 9, 2012)

If you need superior AF, 5D3 will do it. 6D if you don't need the extra superior AF performance. For studio, street and landscape, definitely, 6D. Macro, it depends on what you are shooting. If sports 5D3 or 1DX. For bird shots, you might want to wait for 7D2.


----------

