Canon 6D or 70D?

[dneves]

I'm a semi-serious amateur currently using a Canon 60D and am looking to upgrade. I've researched and checked out both the 6D and the new 70D and just can't decide. Like the idea of going to a full frame sensor (6D) but hate the thought of losing the current "reach" of my 70-300 mm lens.........and really like the high speed shutter of the 70D (8 FPS, I think) as compared to 6D....... then there is the build quality....... would love to hear your thoughts.

[markeb]

What other glass do you have? Are you heavily vested in APS-C?

 

This is a tough one for me. I love the theory of FF, but the 6D just seems kind of meh to me. Not sure why, but it is. If you've got a decent investment in APS-C lenses, I'd go with the 70D, if not, I might look more seriously at the 6D, but I still find myself asking if I wouldn't rather hold out for a 5D, in spite of the cost...

 

Oh, and this is from a guy who's still using a rebel T2i! And I have thought about upgrading.

[awboater]

Before upgrading bodies, make sure your lenses are up to task. A premium set of lenses will outperform most body upgrades.

 

For example, when going from an entry-level DSLR to a full frame DSLR, you are going to get maybe 1 stop improvement in low-light performance. And that 1 stop might cost you $3~5k. But if you are still with an 18-55mm kit lens, at 50mm, the minimum aperture is going to be f/5.6.

 

But if you do even a modest lens upgrade to say a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 (or the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8) from a 18-55mm kit lens, then you are gaining 2 stops at 50mm for less than $600. Far more cost-effective in my view. Of course, there is the DoF consideration when using a faster lens wide open, but you get my point.

 

Yea, I know - it's not as cool to buy new lenses as bodies, but lenses can do wonders for your image quality.

 

Even if you have sufficient lenses for your APS-C camera - depending what you got, you may have to buy new ones when upgrading to a full frame camera.

 

Of course, if you already have the lenses - then go for the better camera.

Edited February 23, 2014 by awboater

[rhkennerly]

I bought the 70D, mostly for the servo driven autofocus in video mode. Eyes are just not up to the task of hard focusing on the flip-out screen any more, particularly in sunlight.

 

Plus it has some automatic modes that are so easy, that even She, who must be obeyed, can use it without a tutorial or me having to tag along.

 

I agree with the above. Good glass will beat any marginal upgrade in quality from sensor size for most of us, I think.

 

I saw a professional photag recently who'd invested a whole lot into a quality aftermarket super fast lens fitted on a Canon Rebel. She had the right priorities, I think. Her work was superb.

[NoahtheRed]

What other glass do you have? Are you heavily vested in APS-C?

 

This is a tough one for me. I love the theory of FF, but the 6D just seems kind of meh to me. Not sure why, but it is. If you've got a decent investment in APS-C lenses, I'd go with the 70D, if not, I might look more seriously at the 6D, but I still find myself asking if I wouldn't rather hold out for a 5D, in spite of the cost...

 

Oh, and this is from a guy who's still using a rebel T2i! And I have thought about upgrading.

 

 

Agreed. The 6D is FF and has arguably the best low-light performance under $3000....but beyond that, it's not really a huge upgrade. Moreover, if you have a decent number of EF-S lenses, I'd say invest in glass first. The upgrade from the 60D to the 70D is pretty clear, but I think you'd be better served spending that money on better lenses.

 

As for the 70-300, are you talking about the kit telephoto? If that's the case, take the $1500-$2000 you'd spend on the 6D and get a 70-200/2.8 IS II and bask in it's eternal glory. Seriously, unless you are doing like....hardcore bird photography, the 70-200 is going to blow it out of the water. Every time I use my 75-300, I die a little inside because it seems to go soft at every opportunity. Seriously, the 70-200 on your 60D will be a better investment than a 70D or a 6D right now.

[peety3]

About a year ago, I rented a 6D to fill in for a 7D that was in the shop. At the time, we had a 1D3, two 7D, and a 40D. We had two events to shoot, and both my wife and I really prefer having two bodies to have two lenses ready. I'm the gearhead and therefore most able to think through lens choice with mixed-crop bodies, so she had the 7D and 40D, and I had the 1D3 and 6D. The 6D felt cheap, sounded cheap, and felt as sluggish as the 40D. It was quickly crossed off the "let's consider purchasing" list.

 

I've since taken the FF plunge, and I really do miss the long end of my 70-200. If you aren't ready to "replace" whatever you have on the long end with something longer, I'd wait until you're ready to do that before going FF. I'm hoping there's a new-model 100-400 soon.

[dneves]

thanks for the suggestions everyone. I have invested in some high quality glass so that isn't an issue. Just wondering if moving from the 60D to the 70D is worth the price. I really like the improved focusing ability apparently of the 70D over the 60D as my eyes get worse and I see some really good potential shots that I take ruined due to less then adequate focus.