# 6D or 7D mkII?



## dkooijman72 (Aug 14, 2014)

Hello all,

I have a 450D now with a 15-85. I want to replace the body with a higher quality sensor which both the 6d and 7d ii will have. I' mainly shooting landscapes and (safaris when i can...) of course we still don't know what the 7d ii will look like but but my doubt is between these two bodies. Both will be a leap in quality wrt the 450d. I have startex to sell my work and like to print at least at A3 size. Will a 24MP of a crop sensor win over a FF 20 MP? 
Any suggestions? I can't really make up my mind...fortunately i still have time as the mkii still isn't out yet...

Thanks!


----------



## Ruined (Aug 14, 2014)

dkooijman72 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I have a 450D now with a 15-85. I want to replace the body with a higher quality sensor which both the 6d and 7d ii will have. I' mainly shooting landscapes and (safaris when i can...) of course we still don't know what the 7d ii will look like but but my doubt is between these two bodies. Both will be a leap in quality wrt the 450d. I have startex to sell my work and like to print at least at A3 size. Will a 24MP of a crop sensor win over a FF 20 MP?
> Any suggestions? I can't really make up my mind...fortunately i still have time as the mkii still isn't out yet...
> ...



I doubt the 7D2 sensor is going to be radically better at high ISOs than the 70D sensor, as the 70D sensor was recently introduced and was a new design in itself.

In low to moderate light, the 6D will win this battle easily due to the FF sensor's lower noise at higher ISOs. In good light, it depends what you are shooting; for landscapes, the 6D will do significantly better and offers higher quality ultrawide lenses; but, for a safari, the extra reach and more advanced AF of the 7D2/70D will likely be more beneficial. The 7D2 will probably also have better weather sealing than the 6D, which could again be important for a less controlled safari environment.

If you are buying now, you also will likely pay a price premium for the 7D2 so it will be likely more expensive than a 6D.

If it were me based on your requirements, I would pick the 6D given what is likely to be introduced with the 7D2. It sounds like landscapes are your primary usage and the 6D with a EF 16-35mm f/4L IS has no quality focal length match in a crop camera like the 7D2. When you go on safaris, the 6D AF may be a bit more challenging and you may need to crop in post, but that does not sound like it will be where most of your usage will be.

For UWA landscape, here is an example of the best 16mm FOV equivalent on crop vs the best 16mm on full frame:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=950&Camera=736&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=949&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp

Another option might be buying both a 6D and a 70D - the 6D for most of your work, and the 70D for reach limited scenarios that also need more advanced AF like a safari might be. The 70D will probably be available for under $850 refurbed by the holidays, and the 6D comes up every few months for $1250 refurbed - the two together would likely be in the same price range of a single 7D2 at launch price. Plus it would give you a backup body and the ability to select FF or crop based on what your are shooting.


----------



## LSeries (Aug 14, 2014)

dkooijman72 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I have a 450D now with a 15-85. I want to replace the body with a higher quality sensor which both the 6d and 7d ii will have. I' mainly shooting landscapes and (safaris when i can...) of course we still don't know what the 7d ii will look like but but my doubt is between these two bodies. Both will be a leap in quality wrt the 450d. I have startex to sell my work and like to print at least at A3 size. Will a 24MP of a crop sensor win over a FF 20 MP?
> Any suggestions? I can't really make up my mind...fortunately i still have time as the mkii still isn't out yet...
> ...



I believe that for pure landscape shooting 6D wins unless 7D mk II is going have some kind of a miracle sensor  I wouldn't pick 6D for bird photography, though. If you want to play safe, then just wait for 7D mk II to be officially announced.


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 14, 2014)

I think the 7dII will have the potential to be closer in price to the 5DIII. Consider that as well. Though if you wait until it is released the 6 might have come down in price. Also....used 7 d's will get cheaper and may make a great pairing with the 6d.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 14, 2014)

6d for landscape... for safaris, rent a 7d mkii and a 100-400mkii.


----------



## Sabaki (Aug 14, 2014)

Anyone know how the 6D's AF system compares to that of a Rebel?


----------



## Famateur (Aug 14, 2014)

Seems like good advice so far. Here are a few more thoughts to consider...

This is really a decision between full frame and crop for your needs, especially when we don't know what a 7DII will have, if released.

If you choose the 6D, you'll need a new lens (the EF-S 15-18 will not work). This brings the cost of switching to full frame up more than just the cost of the 6D body. Selling the 450D and 15-85 would offset that, if you don't plan to keep them. Also, you can occasionally find the 6D and 24-105L kit for about $2k. I think I've seen kit-separated 24-105L lenses go for around $650, so that makes the 6D around $1,350 new if you sell the 24-105L.

The sensor in the 6D is considered by some to be Canon's best. I would be surprised if the 7DII sensor produced better image quality. At high ISO values, it's reasonable to assume it won't touch the 6D (although I'd love to be surprised!). This makes it a matter of reach and AF performance versus superior image quality. You'll have to decide which you value more. If doing mostly landscape, I would say 6D. If doing mostly wildlife, I would say that whatever Canon's next top crop camera will be will have the reach and AF performance to "get the shot" and good enough image quality at lower ISO values to make beautiful prints at the sizes you desire.

If you don't need a wildlife powerhouse (super-high frame rates, weather sealing, powerful AF tracking), then the 70D would probably do fine (it's no slouch) for the safari's where you need reach and reasonably good AF. Depending on your lens choice (and Canon's pricing for its next top crop), you might be able to do 6D and 70D together for the price of the 7DII.

Good luck! With hope of announcements from Canon just around the corner, it's a fun time to be shopping for a camera...


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Aug 14, 2014)

Sabaki said:


> Anyone know how the 6D's AF system compares to that of a Rebel?


The current Rebel T5i have all focus points cross-type, and the central point of focus is dual cross-type. The 6D has no focus point dual cross-type, but can do autofocus in very dark environments. 

In short, 6D has lower performance with focus points outside the center, and is slower to focus, but you can do it even in darkness.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 14, 2014)

Sabaki said:


> Anyone know how the 6D's AF system compares to that of a Rebel?



6d has 1 really good center af cross type point, rest are ok. But for landscape, portraiture, product, etc.. It is really good... stuff that doesn't move.


----------



## LSeries (Aug 14, 2014)

Famateur said:


> If you don't need a wildlife powerhouse (super-high frame rates, weather sealing, powerful AF tracking), then the 70D would probably do fine (it's no slouch) for the safari's where you need reach and reasonably good AF. Depending on your lens choice (and Canon's pricing for its next top crop), you might be able to do 6D and 70D together for the price of the 7DII.



Yeah, I've been using the 70D for wildlife since its launch and I must say it's really, really good. I'm still waiting for the 7D II


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 14, 2014)

if you are going wide angle, go FF.

The glass you pick will probably have more impact on your photos than which camera body you pick....


----------



## dgatwood (Aug 14, 2014)

IMO, the 6D does a decent job for birds. It's not the greatest, but it certainly isn't terrible:



























(Yes, I know I need to do lots of color and gamma correction on these pictures; it was a pretty dreary day, or in the case of the first photo, night.)


----------



## NancyP (Aug 15, 2014)

6D is king for landscapes - everything you need, nothing you don't need. 11 points for focus confirmation is fine - I manual focus anyway (partly because I have fewer full frame modern Canon lenses in the wide - normal - short telephoto range and am using my old film lenses with adapters, for the time being). 6D is great for wide angle landscape astrophotography, or wide-star-field astrophotography using camera lenses.

7D2 should be positioned as the "pro-grade" crop camera for action and wildlife, where one wants to shoot with a supertelephoto. On the 7Dclassic, files are plenty good if light is ample and one is using ISO of 400 or less. I have the 60D and its sensor is very similar to the 7Dclassic. The hope is that the sensor noise issue will be improved by 1 stop, with a little improvement coming from improved sensitivity (not a lot of wiggle room there) and more improvement coming from the sensor analog-to-digital processing.

I am still using my crop camera for birding and as a one-lens travel and hiking camera, with the 15-85mm, which is a great walkaround lens and handles a lot of landscape work. For birding, I like the "extra reach" of the crop camera with the 400mm f/5.6L.


----------



## dkooijman72 (Aug 15, 2014)

Thanks a lot to everyone who has replied. I appreciate it a lot. I already had been leaning towards the 6D, and I'm more convinced now. I realize this will of course mean a new lense as well, which was one of the things making me doubt.
I think getting a 70D as an extra body might be an option but only with a good long lense. I have a 75-300 unstabilised now and that's not working unless I use fast shutter speeds.

As there might be a new 100-400 soon, the old version might get cheaper, and might be a better option to get more reach.

Again thanks for your opinions, it really helps.


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 15, 2014)

If you start to see big rebates on the 100-400 jump on it. The new one will likely be much more expensive and once announced will tend to stabilize or even inflate the price of the current one. This has happened before. Good for those looking to upgrade as it protects your gear value, but bad for cheapskate opportunists like me.


----------



## Chisox2335 (Aug 15, 2014)

I've got a 6d and a 70d. If I don't need speed or a bunch of autofocus points hands down the image quality of the 6d is superior. Because the non center points are not cross type AF points it's not as good as the 70d for BIF. I think for the most part you can get by with the AF on the 6d. It certainly has limitations but you adjust and the iq is astounding.


----------



## TeT (Aug 15, 2014)

bbasiaga said:


> I think the 7dII will have the potential to be closer in price to the 5DIII. ...



5D III price dropping like a stone.... 6 mo ago on eBay used 5D III for 2500+, now new 5D III for that price point...


----------



## Moulyneau (Aug 16, 2014)

(Don't know I'm still in as I didn't post for some time...)

I have 5D3 + 6D and use the latter almost only with uwa. Agree with others than 6D with new 16-35 IS is hard to beat for landscapes. 7D2 will surely be a fine camera but imo with a somewhat different usage.


----------



## candc (Aug 16, 2014)

i have a 6d and a 70d, in good light there is not much iq difference. the 6d is of course much better at high iso. paired with the new 16-35is you have the ability to shoot landscapes at small apertures in low light. if you are normally shooting in good light it doesn't matter much. below is a comparison between the 6d + 16-35 f/4 (16mm) and the 70d + sigma 8-16 (10mm) i have taken about 100 comparison shots just to see what the difference is and in good light you have to look really close to see anything and then sometimes it's not clear. don't get caught up thinking there is some massive iq difference between the formats that just jumps off the screen at you.


----------



## BJK (Nov 21, 2014)

Bumping an old thread, rather than starting a new 6D v. 7Dmk2 thread....which there have been surprisingly few of since the 7Dmk2 has actually been released to the masses.

I'm an amateur photographer, looking to upgrade from my T3i. I like shooting sports, but they're not all I shoot; I'm only going to have the one camera, so I'd like it to be an all-purpose choice.

When I do shoot sports, I usually pick the spot where the action is going, rather than panning (which is what the 7D2 is supposed to do much better than the T3i does). On paper, the 6D looks like an improvement in all aspects (even AF) over my current kit. I am a bit concerned about reach when shooting FF from the bleachers, but an improvement with high ISO noise would be a huge step up, particularly shooting indoor sports (basketball). It also has the best IQ / sensor of the 3 options...and would do better with landscapes / family photos when I'm not shooting sports.

7D2 is still crop (though I'd need to buy a weather-sealed lens before taking advantage of the build quality), and it is as good with noise as I'll find on a crop sensor. It works with my 15-85. It's also rather pricey for a hobby camera.

Final option is the 70D, which didn't stop being a bad camera just because there's a 7D2. AF and noise are better than the T3i, but the other options excel in one facet of performance or the other. It also costs half as much as the 6D+24-105L or the 7D2.

Anyone else struggling with an upgrade path?


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 21, 2014)

BJK said:


> I'm an amateur photographer, looking to upgrade from my T3i. I like shooting sports, but they're not all I shoot; I'm only going to have the one camera, so I'd like it to be an all-purpose choice.



The 6d isn't designed to be a all-purpose camera, and that's that. Some people find you can get away using it as such, and I also try to as I cannot afford a 5d3. But I won't stir up this discussion again here. From my experience with the 6d I can only advise: Make very sure you're fine with single-point center tracking, have high-contrast targets and don't depend on a high keeper rate. 



BJK said:


> Final option is the 70D, which didn't stop being a bad camera just because there's a 7D2. AF and *noise are better than the T3i*, but the other options excel in one facet of performance or the other. It also costs half as much as the 6D+24-105L or the 7D2



The 70d's sensor is only marginally better than the old 18mp crop. Sure the 70d is a nice and competent camera, even tough Magic Lantern doesn't run on it (yet). But Canon has removed spot af from the 70d so you should make sure the large af points work for what you do.

Question here really is: _What are your current lenses, what's your budget?_


----------



## jdramirez (Nov 21, 2014)

I shot sports with my 60d & I primarily used my center af point... 

How much cash do you have... because the t3i plus kit lens is worth $375 if you sold it... 

I'd personally lean towards a 7d used for sports... maybe for $650, & a 6d for practically everything else. The best all round camera by Canon is the 5d mkiii (revised from typo before where I said mkii), and if you can't afford that, then you are stuck with two bodies

1200+650-350= $1500... otherwise. Just be happy with your t3i.


----------



## candc (Nov 22, 2014)

I would go for the 70d. You already have a 15-85.The 70d is a very good all around camera with wifi, touch swivel screen, great dpaf live view, afma, and a pop-up flash. I never had a 7d but some posters here say the af is better on the 70d. I have the 6d, 70d, and the 7dii. I think the 70d is the best general purpose dslr you can get without going to a much more expensive body. You are going to see some really good deals next week.


----------



## bholliman (Nov 22, 2014)

I think the 6D is a good general purpose body as long as you don't shoot a bunch of action stuff. For six months after buying my 6D I kept my 7D to use for action, but I found I hardly ever used the 7D after getting used to the IQ and high ISO performance of the 6D. I also found the 6D's AF to be more accurate than the 7D's for non sports applications. I find the non-center AF points to be useful for many situations.

The 7D2 is a great option if you really need a top notch AF system. I plan to rent one next weekend and try it at our sons high school basketball game.


----------



## BJK (Nov 22, 2014)

Thanks to everyone who's posted thusfar. To answer some of the questions:
- Lenses: 50mm f/1.8, 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, 200mm f/2.8L, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS (non-L)
The 15-85 is my only EF-S lens...which also means I'd need to buy a new "general purpose" zoom if I did go full-frame.

- Budget: I don't really think about it in these terms, since I feel fortunate enough to have a job whereby I can justify spending $2,000.00 for something I'll use for the next 5+ years for a hobby. It is more an issue of opportunity cost -- if I buy the 6D + 24-105L over the 70D...it's about a thousand dollars I can't spend on other hobbies, or on tickets to the sporting events I like to photograph, or upgrading my other equipment.
Based on what I'm considering, my effective budget is less than the 5D3, but enough to justify the other options...so less than $2k.

- Can't sell the T3i, as it's going to a family member if / when I upgrade my camera body.
- Also can't see buying the 7D mark 1, since low light noise is one of my major concerns when upgrading. This is an example of a picture of mine that I love...but for the noise I see when putting the picture on a large monitor / HDTV. (I did take this picture before buying the 200 f/2.8L...but I haven't had a chance to shoot with the new lens in that setting.)


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 22, 2014)

BJK said:


> This is an example of a picture of mine that I love



For 100% crop you probably won't be happy with a 7d2+f2.8 lens either for this. The shot shows motion blur, so 1/500s was too slow for this kind of movement - and with 1/1500s you'd be still @iso6400 with the 7d2 (if the shot was properly exposed).

Question is how much magnification you're interested in, i.e. if you are ok with downsized web resolution. If not, most of your shots on flickr I just looked at don't have thin dof *and* motion, but sometimes a bit slow shutter speed. For most movement from *afar* like basketball the 6d will be fine if you're ok with loosing some shots because the af screwed up. But all other lower light shots on your flickr stream would profit a lot from thinner dof of full frame and higher iso capability. Your call 

Note that rodeo with fast movement off center in lower light would be a problem for the 6d, but this is a really difficult scene and there's a reason people buy $15k pro gear like 1dx+600mm for this. With the 6d, focus & recompose you have to be ready to have a low keeper rate. With ff, you also lack the reach advantage of crop so your 200mm might be too short if you cannot get closer.


----------



## tayassu (Nov 22, 2014)

If you shoot mostly landscapes, go for the 6D; there are way better UWA options for FF than for APS-C. 
For safaris, your landscape lenses probably won't be long enough, so rent what you need.


----------



## candc (Nov 22, 2014)

tayassu said:


> If you shoot mostly landscapes, go for the 6D; there are way better UWA options for FF than for APS-C.
> For safaris, your landscape lenses probably won't be long enough, so rent what you need.


'

i don't know why people say that. there are a lot of good, reasonably priced uwa lenses for aps-c. 

canon 10-18, 10-22
sigma 8-16, 10-22
tokina 11-16
tamron 10-24


----------



## Marsu42 (Nov 22, 2014)

candc said:


> tayassu said:
> 
> 
> > If you shoot mostly landscapes, go for the 6D; there are way better UWA options for FF than for APS-C.
> ...



+1, actually uwa is the one area where aps-c excels: The mirror is smaller = the end of the ef-s lens is nearer to the sensor = you can build a better uwa for the same price since the construction is less demanding!


----------



## BJK (Nov 23, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Question is how much magnification you're interested in, i.e. if you are ok with downsized web resolution. If not, most of your shots on flickr I just looked at don't have thin dof *and* motion, but sometimes a bit slow shutter speed. For most movement from *afar* like basketball the 6d will be fine if you're ok with loosing some shots because the af screwed up. But all other lower light shots on your flickr stream would profit a lot from thinner dof of full frame and higher iso capability. Your call



I do not disagree with you on the dof and higher ISO. Not sure I'll be able to get more dof while shooting from the cheap seats (even with the f/2.8 ), but less noise is something I would love to improve in dark settings.

It's the non-sports pictures where I think I could get more dof with a 6D...which is the way I'm leaning right now. I may try the 70-300 for baseball game or two, and decide if I like the added reach on FF (300mm as compared to the 200mm f/2.8 on FF) enough to upgrade to the L-version someday. The 200 will still be a useful lens when I shoot basketball, or when I can get closer to the field.

My keeper rate's not great with the T3i, so I don't see it being any worse with the 6D. Also, thank you for the flickr critique; I'm always looking for ways to improve.


----------

