# Question for super-experts



## GP.Masserano (Aug 28, 2016)

My current equipment: Canon EOS 7DmkII + 8/16 Sigma + 24/70 f4 L + 100 macro f2.8 L + 100/400 L mkII + 24/105 STM for photos of nature and travel.
I would like to broaden the kit for the landscape with Canon EOS 6D (for use in particular with 24/70 or 24/105 STM) and 70/300 USM IS L (that i prefer to 70/200 F4 L is)
Questions for super-experts : it is a good choice?
Canon has intention to leave in the near future a MK2 version of 6D ?
(I would NOT buy a camera FF to 1300euros and then discover that is going to be a version MK2...  

Thanks for your answers!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 28, 2016)

I would not expect you to see any noticeable difference from adding a 6D, your 7D MK II can pickup good detail. The advantage of FF tends to be toward low light use.

You would likely notice more difference by adding a high end Canon lens like the 11-24mm L f/4 the on your 7D MK II


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2016)

The 1DX was replaced after 4 1/4 years....
The 5D3 was replaced after 4 1/2 years....
The 7D was replaced after 5 years.....
The 6D has been out for 4 years.....

At the moment, the 6D is the oldest camera in the Canon fleet.... although there have been no official announcements or solid rumors about it, the odds that it will be replaced in the next year are very high


----------



## GP.Masserano (Aug 28, 2016)

Unfortunately the 11-24 is out of my budget... :'(

I would like to try the FF but the 6D has been put on the market in 2010 and I do not want to find in my hands a camera "obsolete" !


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 28, 2016)

I'm in the same boat as you.....

I have the 7D2, it is a fantastic "high pixel density" camera, and am also looking at a FF camera that should be good in low light.... I am hoping that a 6D2 will soon come out and keep the lower pixel count and even better low light ability...


----------



## lion rock (Aug 28, 2016)

Set aside some funds for various filters, CPL, Big Stop/Little Stop, graded ND, etc., for landscapes. These are quite useful.
-r


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 28, 2016)

GP.Masserano said:


> Unfortunately the 11-24 is out of my budget... :'(
> 
> I would like to try the FF but the 6D has been put on the market in 2010 and I do not want to find in my hands a camera "obsolete" !



Expect a 6D MK II early next year. Six months from now. Also expect the price to rise, probably $2100-$2400 at the start. The 6D has dropped in price over the years from its original $2100 price. If the 6D MK II moves up market a little, the price might go over the original $2100. The Dual Pixel Tech is more expensive, so it will hold the price up.

So, if you can afford a 6D MK II, you can afford the $2500 11-24mm lens by selling your Sigma. The lens will not become obsolete soon


----------



## candyman (Aug 28, 2016)

I use the 6D in combination with the canon 16-35mm f/4 IS for landscape. The image quality is very good and the combination is light to carry when out in the field. I also use LEE filters with the LEE system 100. The 35mmm FF will give you wide on the 16mm - more than on the crop camera. Yes, the 6D is in the market for some time with expected replacement in 2017. But, that does not make the 6D a bad camera for landscape!


----------



## Drum (Aug 28, 2016)

The 6D won't be obsolete it will just be an older generation. it will still take the same quality of pictures the day the 6Dii is released as it does today. The 6Dii is likely to be double the price. Another suggestion for you is the 5D mark 3 which is still a great camera and would have a similar AF system to the one you are used to in the 7Dii, BUT is going for a great deal less than it used to!!


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 28, 2016)

A lot depends on how hyper-critical you are. What is acceptable to me is said by some to be 'night and day' differences with the 7D2 bordering on unusable. 

I have had the 7D2 for 18months and recently bought the 6D. There is little difference between them below ISO 1600 so landscapes in decent light you may be disappointed. I bought the 6D for low light work and better shadow recovery so it really depends on what you take pictures of.

As Mt Spokane says, if the 6D2 is viable then the 11-24 certainly is!


----------



## pwp (Aug 29, 2016)

As well as a couple of FF bodies, I have a 7D MkII. For most work, it's output is highly competent and more than adequate for most projects. You've got a great camera.

As Mt Spokane suggests, the way forward may be investing in glass. However if you must go FF, there are some good options. The 6D is very likely to be replaced next year, but much more expensive than the very good outgoing 6D. There may even be run-out pricing coming up in a few months. 

With the release of the 5D MkIV, there will be good numbers of well cared for 5D Mk III's coming onto the used market. The 5D Mk IV release may also trigger upgraditis from current 6D owners. 

-pw


----------



## chauncey (Aug 29, 2016)

You do not need a new camera...start buying prime canon lenses and learn how to take pictures in manual mode.


----------



## kirispupis (Aug 29, 2016)

I have a 6D and used to own a 7D2. It used to backup my 5D3, but now my 5D3 backs up my 1Dx2 and I've converted the 6D to infrared.

Yes, this is an old body - but it's still very capable. I wouldn't buy one new. You can find a Canon refurbished one or a used one on LensAuthority for about $1200. You'll see a significant improvement in image quality between the 6D and the 7D2 - roughly two stops. Also, when you sell it you won't take too much of a hit.

I was never really happy with the image quality from the 7D2, but I used it for its reach with wildlife shots. I found that above ISO 800 the noise was too high for professional applications. The 6D, however, can go up to about ISO 3200.

If you're on a budget, I think you'll achieve a lot more flexibility by picking one up. Eventually you'll want to buy a wider angle lens. Note that I don't believe the Sigma 8-16 will work on a FF camera.


----------



## tpatana (Aug 29, 2016)

GP.Masserano said:


> My current equipment: Canon EOS 7DmkII + 8/16 Sigma + 24/70 f4 L + 100 macro f2.8 L + 100/400 L mkII + 24/105 STM for photos of nature and travel.
> I would like to broaden the kit for the landscape with Canon EOS 6D (for use in particular with 24/70 or 24/105 STM) and 70/300 USM IS L (that i prefer to 70/200 F4 L is)
> Questions for super-experts : it is a good choice?
> Canon has intention to leave in the near future a MK2 version of 6D ?
> ...



My answer as super-expert is to stop using slash on the lens names and use dash like it's supposed.

As for camera, I wouldn't get 6D at this point, since 6D2 is soon coming out. Other options are 5D4, or if you want to save some money get good deals on 5D3.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Aug 29, 2016)

*My answer as super-expert is to stop using slash on the lens names and use dash like it's supposed.*


I did not think was so important...shall recall in the future


----------



## GP.Masserano (Aug 29, 2016)

chauncey said:


> You do not need a new camera...start buying prime canon lenses and learn how to take pictures in manual mode.



I think NOBODY has really need a new camera...and is not the doctor that he has commanded us to buy it! 
But, this is a hobby and as such are sometimes your cravings to satisfy, don't you think ?

...and then I do not think that in manual mode the pictures are better than in AV at f 8!
I think instead that the sensor FF is more suitable to the landscapes because more flexible as dynamic range for all the shades of color.


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 29, 2016)

If you want a new FF camera now, I would get the 6D now. If you can wait a year, then you can compare the incrementally improved cameras then. Unlikely to be vast improvements in image quality, but features like AF will improve on some models (like the 6Dii).


----------



## photojoern.de (Aug 29, 2016)

6D is a great buy for landscape full format. See if you can have a good deal. The updates for the 6DII will be visible - but are they worth 1000 USD? 6D plus 24-70 L 2.8 is an awesome combination. Add the 16-35 L f4 IS and you have a wonderful landscape FF kit.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2016)

photojoern.de said:


> 6D is a great buy for landscape full format. See if you can have a good deal. The updates for the 6DII will be visible - but are they worth 1000 USD? 6D plus 24-70 L 2.8 is an awesome combination. Add the 16-35 L f4 IS and you have a wonderful landscape FF kit.



I'm surprised you know the price of a camera that has not even been announced!

Ina body it is the sensor that defines quality and if you look at the BH photo video about the 5DmkIV, they say the improvements are small but noticeable. I anticipate the changes to the 6D to be in the same vein. But given that the date of the 6DII is not yet known then how long do you want to wait? A year? 2 years? And in the meantime you are taking photos with a camera you seem to be convinced is not up to the job for landscapes.

And while people are talking about a 6Dii there is also talk of a 'brand new' DSLR as well. So will you prefer the 6D2 or the 'brand new' one? 

So I say buy the 6D now and enjoy taking photos and see what comes along. If the 6D proves to be the improvement you want then you have been using it. if the 6D is not the improvement you hoped for you have had a shot of realism for when they next cycle of bodies is released.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Aug 29, 2016)

Thanks for the information. 
I read on some forums that the 6D would have some problem in autofocus (especially for me accustomed to the extreme speed of the EOS 7DII), but I do not believe that this is relevant for the landscape, macro, portrait or photo in studio.
As stated previously, I believe instead that the accuracy of detail and the dynamic range of the FF of 6D are excellent, in some cases even higher than those of the 5DIII and certainly better than the 7DII.
Also I am not interested in running below to latest innovations in the market: a long time ago I bought a EOS1 and a EOS3 (rollfilm) and i used them for about 20 years... 
I am convinced that the technical characteristics of the 6DII will be slightly higher than the 6D, but the price will certainly be much higher... 

PS: sorry if I write this'now but in Italy are the 19:46 And I am going to go to dinner...


----------



## FramerMCB (Aug 29, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> photojoern.de said:
> 
> 
> > 6D is a great buy for landscape full format. See if you can have a good deal. The updates for the 6DII will be visible - but are they worth 1000 USD? 6D plus 24-70 L 2.8 is an awesome combination. Add the 16-35 L f4 IS and you have a wonderful landscape FF kit.
> ...



I think the poster is "guesstimating" the new body will at least exceed by $1000USD what one can currently buy a 6D for. You can get a refurbished on sale at the Canon USA store (online) (comes with same 1-year warranty as new bodies) for just over $1000USD (I've seen them at $1099USD). It is a good camera body. And for the price difference between the current and the guess to where the new model comes out (and I do believe it will be in the first quarter of 2017) one could invest in more glass. And as others have suggested to the OP. One wouldn't take much of a hit by buying a 6D now. In fact, if the OP buys one now, he can use it for a few months to see if the gains for his style of shooting are what he's looking for. If not, he can sell it at not much loss (if any) prior to the new version being released.

I don't see much downside for the OP in picking up a 6D now... (my 2-cents)


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2016)

GP.Masserano said:


> I read on some forums that the 6D would have some problem in autofocus (especially for me accustomed to the extreme speed of the EOS 7DII), but I do not believe that this is relevant for the landscape, macro, portrait or photo in studio.



I have been doing comparisons of focus between the two bodies using the centre focus point with 100-400 Mk II, focusing on small birds (sparrows) in a clump of bamboo from a distance of about 15metres , which means the background is both complex and very close to the bird. 
The AF point for both cameras barely covers the bird's chest and the 6D is more assured. If you get placement of the AF point slightly wrong on the 7D it can hunt a bit more often but the 6D just hits it. The more I try this the more I am sure that this is because on all cameras the AF area is often a bit bigger than the point shown in the viewfinder and with more pixels the 7DII is more likely to try and focus on something else.

But of course for moving subjects the 7Dii is far superior. 

So as you say for landscape, studio etc the 6D loses nothing. In fact I am tempted to say you may find benefits depending on the subject. 
My one caveat is that on the 6D I am less convinced about the accuracy of the outermost focus points but I can live with that.


----------



## BlurredShot (Aug 29, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> GP.Masserano said:
> 
> 
> > I read on some forums that the 6D would have some problem in autofocus (especially for me accustomed to the extreme speed of the EOS 7DII), but I do not believe that this is relevant for the landscape, macro, portrait or photo in studio.
> ...



I'm not a "super expert" or really much of an "expert", but I have been in a similar situation.

I currently own the 7d (mark i) and it has been pretty much lost to my daughter and her photography class. So I've been on the hunt for a new camera body since the launch of the 1Dx ii this past spring. I ended up deciding to wait, and wait, and wait for the 5Div, which I have on pre-order.

In the meantime I invested in some L series glass which breathed new life into my 7D, and watched as my daughter got an A in the class, while I ended up using a film based Eos 1v to take 2 rolls over the summer. (72 pictures when I'm used to way way way more.

Where I'm going with this is do not under-estimate what good lenses will add to your photography, but also don't let tomorrow's camera keep you from taking the pictures you want today.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 1, 2016)

...and if instead got in sale of some old lens and seek this ? (Used, of course)


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 1, 2016)

GP.Masserano said:


> *My answer as super-expert is to stop using slash on the lens names and use dash like it's supposed.*
> 
> 
> I did not think was so important...shall recall in the future



It's not that important-it's just confusing on the eyes to read. My eyes expect to see an f-number around a slash such as f/2.8, so my brain gets fuzzy when used for focal lengths.


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 1, 2016)

GP.Masserano said:


> My current equipment: Canon EOS 7DmkII + 8/16 Sigma + 24/70 f4 L + 100 macro f2.8 L + 100/400 L mkII + 24/105 STM for photos of nature and travel.
> I would like to broaden the kit for the landscape with Canon EOS 6D (for use in particular with 24/70 or 24/105 STM) and 70/300 USM IS L (that i prefer to 70/200 F4 L is)
> Questions for super-experts : it is a good choice?
> Canon has intention to leave in the near future a MK2 version of 6D ?
> ...



Of course Canon has the intention to create in the near future an MK2 version of the 6D. That is almost certain to happen with the 6D, as it is with many other cameras. Pretty much all cameras are on an upgrade cycle — so a new version comes out every few years. You can look up when the 6D was introduced and guess that an MK2 version will be out about 3 years later.

But the MK2 version will almost certainly have an introductory price that is much higher than the current price of the original 6D. That is called introductory pricing. Then the price comes down as each year passes.

No one, no matter how expert, can tell you Canon's true future intentions. But it is easily guessable based on past conduct.


----------



## chauncey (Sep 1, 2016)

You are suffering from the want/need scenario...you can take every picture imaginable with the camera 
that you have, albeit, with maybe different glass. Want wider...learn how to photo-merge images.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Sep 1, 2016)

There is not substitute for good glass.
When I transitioned from video to still photography, I had a lot of photographer friends and followed their advice- invest in glass and grow with bodies. I bought a 40D kit from COSTCO(now my sons) and started adding L glass.
Bodies are really about what you shoot. Back then, I shot mostly daylight subjects. Now I'm into nightscapes, sports, and whatever interests me. My 50Ds have new homes and my 7D is still here for some reason. My 5D III has been awesome and is going to a new home as soon as the mark IV arrives.
I have the 5DS and use it for everything but night or low light work. 
So, my advise is to go with really good glass first. All Canon sensors perform well in daylight but it's the glass that will make a big difference. My old 7D with the 300 2.8 produces amazing results, so why upgrade? Some people want the latest and greatest for their ego or bragging rights. Upgrade to your needs, not peer pressure.


----------



## rfdesigner (Sep 1, 2016)

I own a 6D

6D FF advantages

1. Low light
2. Wide angle shots can be had with shallow DoF. Something you can't do anything like as well on a crop. (24mmf1.4 on FF ~= 18mmf0.9 on crop, which you simply can't buy)
3. Of the old gen sensors the 6D was the best having almost zero banding (I've only found banding in a couple of shots with my camera now on about 3000 shutter count) It's also VERY sensitive.
4. The DR of the 6D is better than the 7DII at base, which you might just use for landscape.

The 6DII if it has a sensor as good as the 5DIV will make a big difference in DR.

As has been said, the 6DII will be substantially dearer than the 6D, so yes it will be better, almost certainly having a reasonable AF system as opposed to the fairly limited one in the 6D (which is still a step up on the 5DII AF) But for landscape you've got liveview AF so this doesn't matter.

The other thing you'll find with a 6D is for low light action the 7DII will nail the AF but 100% will be poor images, the 6D AF will miss 75% of the shots but the 25% that are good will be keepers.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 3, 2016)

chauncey said:


> You are suffering from the want/need scenario...you can take every picture imaginable with the camera
> that you have, albeit, with maybe different glass. Want wider...learn how to photo-merge images.



Probably you are right... :
But you must admit that in our hobby, many of us are continuous research (perhaps hidden) of _"photographic philosopher's stone"..._

More seriously: sometimes I produce prints 50 x 75 for furniture (as those attached) and consequently i need extra sharpness and detail even in shadow zones.
Lately I am working much in HDR, but I would like to make a step forward.

After reading many post, I'm deciding for the 6D or do a..."mortal jump" and step to medium format


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 3, 2016)

For example: a friend want a 50 x 75 of a scottish harbor. 
The photo was taken with a 24mm Leitz to f8. 
Then I applied little sharpening with PS and the print has become quite well, I would say (annex the original file)


----------



## bholliman (Sep 3, 2016)

I think the 6D is a terrific bargain now. For landscape, portraits, and slow moving subjects it's still an excellent camera nearly 4 years after introduction. You can pick up a refurb for around $1,100 or a good used one under $900 in the US. For me that's a lot of camera for this amount of money. Yes, a 6D MkII will probably be introduced in 2017, but it will be considerably more expensive. I don't think 6D used prices are going to get much lower in the next year or two, so your risk buying one now is minimal.

I think the 6D is an ideal compliment to the 7D2, between these two bodies you can shoot about anything. I use my 6D as a backup to my 5DsR and when shooting in low light. I also like to carry it with my 35mm f/2 IS when I want a lightweight setup.


----------



## symmar22 (Sep 3, 2016)

Hello, I think your equipment is very adequate, but I understand your desire to switch to full frame. The 6D is not a bad camera, but it's ending it's career, and the sensor technology is a bit outdated. Canon new line of sensors, featured in the 80D, 1Dx2 and 5D4 are an important improvement. One can guess the 6D2 that will likely arrive within a year will use such a sensor. 

My opinion is that if you want a real jump in image quality, you should wait a bit. If you want to start experimenting with a full frame now, I would advise to try to find a second hand 6D, that you can resell without too much loss when the next one is coming.

As for a lens addition, I would go for the 16-35 f4 IS L, that is one of the best bargains in Canon's lens range. The 11-24 that was mentioned is in my opinion a very specialised lens. It requires excellent skills to compose an interesting image with super wide angles. It's heavy, bulky, doesn't take front filters and costs 3000 Euro in Europe. For that money, I think you could get a 6D2 AND a 16-35 f4 IS that would serve you well for landscapes.

Lots of people are attracted to super wides for landscapes because they think that putting everything in the frame is the way to go, when on the contrary, it is very often selective framing that make landscapes interesting. Aside from being on location at the right moment for the light, the most challenging part in landscapes is the framing, since, contrary to architecture, there is no real limit to what has to be in the frame, only the photographer can decide.

I find that reasonable wide angles (20-35mm) and short to medium telephotos (85-200m) are often the best tools for landscapes. There is of course cases where you need more extreme lenses, but in my opinion it is the exception more than the rule.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 4, 2016)

symmar22 said:


> Lots of people are *attracted to super wides* for landscapes because they think that putting everything in the frame is the way to go, when on the contrary, it is very often selective framing that make landscapes interesting.



I agree 100%! 
When I used the rollfilm (many years ago...unfortunately), my favorite wide angle lens was a 24mm and seemed to me to be excessive even in certain situations.

But we are at the point of departure : there is who tells me that the 6D is perfect for my usage (landscape in particular) and who tells me that it is old and outdated and wait for an _imaginary_ 6DII which will be released when nobody knows.

I begin to regret the times in which there was less choice...

Anyway thank you for the answers


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 4, 2016)

bholliman said:


> *I think the 6D is a terrific bargain now*. For landscape, portraits, and slow moving subjects it's still an excellent camera nearly 4 years after introduction.



CANON EOS 6D BODY 1334EURO (New, packaged, by reliable seller)


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 4, 2016)

I just shot this on the original 5D from 2005. I got my first 5D in 2005 when they first came out, then ran one alongside the 5DII and 6D before selling it a couple of years ago. Just got another mint, late serial number one now for a snip. 

5D + 28m f/2.8 IS, 100 iso, 1/50th, f/5.6. 

So much for 12 bit vs 14 bit, 10 stops DR vs 12 etc ! 

(Incidentally I'd quite happily put a 6D up against an a7rII anyday. But did I mention I sold the 6D ? Oooops.)


----------



## candc (Sep 4, 2016)

this is a comparison shot taken with a 70d + sigma 8-16 @ 10mm and 6d + 16-35 f/4 is @ 16mm. in good light there is not a big iq difference. the 6d combo has some advantages (takes filters, has is)


----------



## candc (Sep 4, 2016)

crops


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 4, 2016)

chauncey said:


> You do not need a new camera...start buying prime canon lenses and learn how to take pictures in manual mode.



Note that the OP asked for "super-experts." :


----------



## mb66energy (Sep 4, 2016)

Coming from 40D / 600D I was always interested in the FF world but:
(1) was unshure how the quality would improve and
(2) how the tele sector would be crippled

5Ds wasn't the allround camera I was searching for. DPAF is interesting for me to be open for video. To check (1) and (2) I bought a 5D classic for 500 Euro (now ~300 Euro) from a dealer second hand.
(1) quality improvement was stunning. The smooth transitions and the per pixel sharpness/clearlyness was stunning. Also expanding the contrast in low contrast scenes gives much cleaner results compared to the APS-C cameras mentioned
(2) wasn't a big deal. My allround lens was the EF-S 60mm and now it is the EF 100mm (depends on shooting style). 5.6 400 is much more versatile on FF.
+(3) 24mm (old EF version) is stunning to shoot
+(4) the camera itself is a joy to use. Great ergonomics and ... such a simple set of features + menues which is dedicated to ... classic shooting.

Maybe a 5D classic if available for low price is a good "decision helper".

As you can see from my signature I have a 2nd one - one remark if you consider buying a 5D classic: Check if the serial number begins at least with a 2 (better display) and if it has the mirror reinforcement strips. There was a problem with loosing mirrors. I had my two 5D classics "upgraded" by Canon for free but this service isn't any longer for free.

Some remarks from a "non-super-expert" who is physicist, doesn't make his living with photography but is interested in high photographic quality at reasonable effort.


----------



## tpatana (Sep 4, 2016)

Sporgon said:


> I just shot this on the original 5D from 2005. I got my first 5D in 2005 when they first came out, then ran one alongside the 5DII and 6D before selling it a couple of years ago. Just got another mint, late serial number one now for a snip.
> 
> 5D + 28m f/2.8 IS, 100 iso, 1/50th, f/5.6.
> 
> ...



That's a nice pic! But having more range in DR makes it easier to make sure we capture everything on the picture, so for mortals it's good to have camera with high DR.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 5, 2016)

candc said:


> this is a comparison shot taken with a 70d + sigma 8-16 @ 10mm and 6d + 16-35 f/4 is @ 16mm. in good light there is not a big iq difference. the 6d combo has some advantages (takes filters, has is)



A couple of thoughts I can say. 
1) observing the center of two files and by enlarging it, you note that the leaves on the right frame are sharper than those of the left frame.
2) always in the right frame (crops), the reflections in the water in the corner are evident while in the file of the left are almost disappeared.

In my opinion this confirms the ability of FF to "retrieve information" in the areas of shade so much more evident with respect to the APC-C.

So in conclusion n sharpness, is certainly important the lens (8-16 Sigma vs 16-35L), but about the dynamic range I do not think that there are doubts!


----------



## symmar22 (Sep 5, 2016)

I think you should not look too much for sharpness difference here, an 80D with 24Mp will give you slightly better resolution the a 6D with 20Mp, given you're using the same lens. With full frame or APS-C, sharpness can be the same, it comes down to the lens quality, shooting technique (tripod), diffraction (f-stop) and low pass filter. Fact is these days, Canon is one of the last brand to use a low pass filter on the sensor, for high end cameras, that clearly reduces details at pixel level. 

It doesn't remove the moiré when there is some, and some sharpness is lost on all pictures. It's a lose-lose situation IMO.

I am looking to replace my old 5D2s for work, and I hesitate between the 5DSr for the resolution and sharpness and a 5D4 for the newer sensor tech, but the low pass filter on the 5D4 is for me a big disappointment.

When using full frame, you look at other details compared to small sensors, higher ISO, better light detail, the joy to use a big viewfinder, in general better files to work with. They are small details for the untrained eye, but are real nonetheless. Not talking about shallower depth of field, that gives you more creative options and better background separation.

Plus if you come from film, there is the pleasure to have a camera that gives you focal lenses you are used to.

If you used roll films, you must be used to things like a big viewfinder, you know what I am talking about. Personally, my favorite tools for landscapes is still my trusted Linhof 4x5 cameras.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 5, 2016)

tpatana said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > I just shot this on the original 5D from 2005. I got my first 5D in 2005 when they first came out, then ran one alongside the 5DII and 6D before selling it a couple of years ago. Just got another mint, late serial number one now for a snip.
> ...



Thanks !

Agreed, more DR is better for exposure options, but to access currently available "high DR" you have to under expose, so gain more highlight recording and then bring up the lowlights. That's all well and good if you are not sacrificing too much tonality. Actually, in the image I posted here, that is an example where the greater "14 stops of DR" would have helped.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 5, 2016)

symmar22 said:


> I think you should not look too much for sharpness difference here, an 80D with 24Mp will give you slightly better resolution the a 6D with 20Mp



I am sorry but I am not agree. 
The sharpness is not only due to the number of pixels but also by their size. 
A sensor FF 20 MP will have larger pixels to capture more light, otherwise we do not understand why the first EOS 1 had 4.1 Mpx and 1Dx ( certainly professional) "only" 18.1! 

The unbridled race to the increase the number of MPX has produced a "monster" as the 5D-S, with which ALL the optics (even those most famous) seem poor...
When photographed with the film, the LEITZ lenses were famous for the micro-contrast more than for the resolving power, thus gave a feeling of great sharpness call "edge effect".


----------



## symmar22 (Sep 5, 2016)

You get more sharpness by increasing the pixel amount, or the optical quality. The only difference for pure sharpness with bigger pixels is that you are less diffraction limited. Larger pixels will allow you to stop down (for example) to f11, when smaller pixels would start to show diffraction at f8 (always an example).

The higher resolution of the 5DS has nothing to do with the quality of the optics, it will just "amplify" the optical flaws. Of course a good lens will use the sensor better, but the same picture taken with the same lens (before the diffraction limit) will be sharper with 50Mp than with 20Mp.

What the bigger pixels can do however, is cleaner high ISO and more DR (cleaner shadows). The full frame allows you to use a wider choice of lenses, to have more background separation (less depth of field by default), and a larger viewfinder.

The difference between nowadays full frame and crop sensor is not as dramatic as it was 10 years ago, nor is the pixels size as important. The 5DS has improved image quality over the 5D3 (except for high ISO) and despite its much smaller pixels, it has less shadow noise, more DR and less banding. 

I saw an interesting test about the Sony A7R2 having finally about the same DR and high ISO capacity than the A7S2, despite having 3.5 more pixels.


----------



## mitchel2002 (Sep 5, 2016)

if you feel like you need ff go for a 5d mark iii as of now you can get a grey market copy for nineteen hundred dollars and that is with out all of the used ones that will be hitting the market 
whatever you do know in your mind that for you its the perfect thing


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 6, 2016)

On one of the most important forum of photography in Italy (JUZAPhoto) ) I read that many 6D are affected by a congenital defect to exposure meter, which under exposes randomly from -0.5 to -1.5 even!
It seems that the defect is not only about the cameras of pre-series but that there is also now.

Someone knows the problem ?


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 6, 2016)

GP.Masserano said:


> On one of the most important forum of photography in Italy (JUZAPhoto) ) I read that many 6D are affected by a congenital defect to exposure meter, which under exposes randomly from -0.5 to -1.5 even!
> It seems that the defect is not only about the cameras of pre-series but that there is also now.
> 
> Someone knows the problem ?



I think that myth probably started because the 6D uses a partial colour meter, which can make it behave quite differently from one that isn't colour based in some situations. With a lot of blue it tended to under expose.


----------



## NancyP (Sep 7, 2016)

My 6D exposes properly.


----------



## GP.Masserano (Sep 29, 2016)

*Incredible ! *
A few weeks ago I wrote about the possibility of a 6D mkII short times and...*now multiply the "items"... *

My dream? 
24 mp (I think that more Mp are unnecessary and expensive in this model of camera)
5fsec are enough
1/8000 (It is not difficult to do) 
more focus points "cross"
Digic 6
price not too high..... : around 2000euros

Wath do you think about?


----------



## SteveM (Sep 29, 2016)

I have a 5D Mklll and a 7D mkll. Full frame carries noticeably more fine detail which suits landscape. Yes, lenses are important, as an everyday lens I use the the 24-105 a lot, I would seriously consider the mkll version of this lens when the test results are out....it is very useful for landscapes saving carrying a lot of additional weight.
Back to bodies, I would not personally buy a 6D, courtesy of its 1 cross type sensor. The 5D Mklll has 41 cross types I think, making focussing far more reliable all across the screen. You can get a 5D Mklll now for the same price as the expected price on the 6D mkll - assuming it happens.
Get a new or well cared for 5D Mklll and then look at high quality glass. I don't struggle with dynamic range, so don't be fooled into spending an extra 2K on an additional 2 stops of dynamic range.


----------

