Bigger Sensor or new technology?

[pfrancke]

Hi,

I currently use the Canon Rebel XTi/400D.  I am considering buying a new body as I am sure technology has changed.  I am a hobbiest at best.

My question; would I be better served going with new technology like the new Rebel XT5i/700D?

or perhaps 60D which is a "better?" line, but probably a little cheaper?

or perhaps 5D which is full-frame, older technology, but has the full-frame sensor and can be had for under $600.00?

Besides everyday normal use, I would want to do low-light use (say forest pictures by moonlight).

Thank you for anything that you can say that would be helpful to my decision making!!

Piet

[TCampbell]

---

@pfrancke wrote:

6D    quick surf showed a refurbished body at $1,400 and a new body at a discount/overstock seller at $1,300.

better image quality, plus better ISO technology, plus easier to use dials,

minus the need to grow into new lenses (which over time might be a plus).

A new world opens, but at a still significant investment.

or 60D  at $500-$600

better ISO, easier dials and superior interface. No way to go wrong with this choice, other than missing the road not traveled.

---

The 6D has that same superior interface.  Once you hit the mid-level bodies, they all get that 2nd dial, 2nd LCD screen, etc.  The layouts aren't identical, just very similar.

I upgraded to full frame mostly for the ISO performance more than anything else.  My Rebel body was a T1i and I found myself in situations either shooting events in very dark settings.  The T1i handled it... but even when using f/2.8 glass (at f/2.8) I found myself forced to max ISO (or 1 stop away) and using shutter speeds so slow that every shot was a test of my ability to be steady.  The noise level at such high ISOs was pretty rough and frankly beyond the ability of most common image editing software's ability to control (which is when I learned about specialized noise-control plug-ins such as the Imagenomic NoiseWare Pro that I use which offers a lot more control over noise.)

I was convinced to "wait" because Canon was going to release the 5D III "sometime in the next few months" (I waited for the better part of 2 years before I caved, bought a 5D II, and a month or two later Canon released the 5D III (no kidding -- you can all thank me, clearly they were holding out for me to cave on that 5D II before they were going to release the III.)  Now I am the proud owner of a "very gently used" (shutter count of 8260 exposures) 5D II ... and a more heavily used 5D III.  

[ebiggs1]

The problem you are asking about is way more involved than sensor size. There is pixel size and that is undoubtedly more significant than sensor size is.

An example is, your cell phone. Some have 40 MP sensors, so why do they  make such horrible photos? They have a tiny sensor the size of a pencil eraser. They cram all those tiny little pixels in a tiny little space. While a point-and-shoot sensor may have the same number of megapixels as a DSLR, they aren't’t equal.  It is how big those pixels actually are.

Ignore the theoretical claims and judge the cameras, not the sensor size. I have seen great photos, and horrible ones, from DSLR's regardless of the sensor or it's size.

You have a XTi, right? I would rather see you get some great lenses first and a new body second. If it is your decision to go FF one day make sure you buy EF and not EF-S lenses. An EF 24-105mm f4 L is a very good place to start.

BTW, I still use my 1D (original 1D) and it only has 4 MP, But those giant pixels on it's sensor are beautiful.

[pfrancke]

I want to be careful and not miss-state your point.  Since you are a FF user, I'm thinking you are saying "upgrading to the 60D is fine, but if the intent is to go FF some day, better to put the money into a great lense now."

And you are saying "Your 1D is great, because it has that tremendous image quality from that large sensor".

I'm thinking that my root issue that made me open the topic is:  In today's age, should the XTi body be upgraded?  And my starting answer was "yes, but how".  And your point (and well taken it is), "by getting great lenses (that have an upward path)".

I think I can agree that lenses are a very important part of the puzzle.  But I'm not sold yet that the XTi isn't obsolete (made obsolete by 10 years of improvements).  Unless you are making the case that a great technology leap is right in front of us.  In effect you might be saying "invest in a lense for now -- two years will see even better body bargains".

I take your point that your original 1D is great and has held its ability - but I don't have that 1D.  My mouth waters, I'm thinking that a 6D is probably as close as I could ever get to what you already have.

[ebiggs1]

There is probably no denying that any camera made today is a "better" body than your XTi is. And I certainly would not suggest you get a 1D as your primary camera. But lenses are where it's at.

[ebiggs1]

Another issue brought into this discussion is the fact my 1D is a CCD sensor and all the newer Canon DSLR's are CMOS.

The argument goes on as to which sensor is/was best. But in certain circumstances my 1D with it's 4 1/2 MP CCD sensor, makes gorgeous prints, up to 8x10. Especially in the skin tone range. The 5D "Classic" you mentioned also excels in portraits.

Some say it is the best.

If you think you have a yearning for a 1 series the 1D Mk II or a Mk III are very good buys right now. And that old saying, "Once you go 1 series, you won't use anything else.", is likely true. 

But each of these bodies 7D, 6D or the xxD series have strengths and weak points. Judge the camera not the sensor!

Check out a 24-105mm f4 first, you will need it or a similar lens sooner or later anyway.

[pfrancke]

ebiggs1 --

HOLY SH*T  um, excuse me for that.  A used 1DMK II can be had at Amazon for less than $500.  So I CAN have that camera that you love.  Video and such don't interest me at all, and having a camera that provides great image quality is very important to me.

I haven't researched this camera at all (thinking that this line is completely out of reach).  I don't think portaits are anything that I would ever get into, but landscapes and night photography will be my targets of interest.

I don't disagree that lenses are where it is at - a camera can't be better than the lens that it sports.

Getting a used 1DMK II has to be considered and will probably be what I will do - though I'm sure there is risk in getting a used camera and this is older technology, I consider such a move to be a TREMENDOUS upgrade over the XTi/400D

[pfrancke]

just a quick update to my thinking..  The 1DMk2 is a great action camera, and it is in the top line.  The 6D is a lesser line and obviously much more expensive, but ISO improvements super great for night shooting.

The 1DMk2 is an easy buy - the 6D would need wife convincing..  DAG GONE, nothing is ever easy, but there it is, an entry into an entirely new world, and still very affordable.  And any lenses that I use with it, will be fine.  In 5 years I probably could get a 6D for 500 or so...

[ebiggs1]

A word of caution, Canon no longer supports the 1D Mk II, it does support the 1D Mk II N. So, make sure you check out your decision and the camera before you lay your money down.

There is a border line in 1D series cameras and it is between the Mk II and the Mk III. The 1D Mk III is a very big improvement over the Mk II.

Don't buy one on my suggestion, check one out for yourself and you decide if it is for you and your needs.

IMHO, I would take a 1D Mk III over any camera available with the exception of the Mk IV or 1Dx. It fits and serves my needs best. But for instance when I shoot a wedding I use four cameras. My Mk III is my primary camera with my 24-70mm f2.8 on it.

I have my 5D Mk II with a 70-200mm f2.8 on it. I have my 7D with a 100-400mm mounted on a tripod.

My Mk II has a 17-40mm f4 on it.

This is what I deem necessary for my needs. You also need to assess what is important to you and get that body or bodies.

Oh, yes, what about the 1D? I usually use it for the engagement photos with a Sigma 85mm f1.4.

It don't get any better, man, go for it.

[pfrancke]

I went for it!  Ordered 1D Mk II N for $490.  It had 120K or there-about clicks on it.  I have my fingers crossed.  To go with it I ordered a refurbished Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens for a little more than $790.  Which should be useful even if the gamble on the 1D Mk2N fails.  (For the price I had to give this a shot).  

If I get the urge for a new camera again, I'll probably do a 6D or a 60D depending on how rich I am and if I'm still married.  And I was very tempted to drop dollars on the Mk III, but did not think I could survive that purchase...  But if I can impress my boss/wife, then who knows...  Again, for under $500, it opens a new world for me.

I thank everyone for helping me navigate through all the possibilities and I understand that choices are all about trade-off and not without risk.

[ebiggs1]

You are golden. A 1D Mk II N and a EF 24-105mm f4 L lens is top drawer equipment in anybodies book. 

Now go out and learn it. From now on, it is not the equipment, it is YOU.

Your choice has at least Canon support (for awhile) so if a shutter should be needed you are good. Probably the worst thing than can happen to a 1 series.

These cameras are built like a tank. It used to be said, you could beat someone to death with a 1D and than take the crime scene photos with it. The Mk II N gets the ability to write different files to either of it's memory cards, learn to use that feature. You can put RAW on one and jpegs on the other.

Another warning, once you shoot with a 1 series you will not want a 6D much less a 60D. I am afraid you are smitten.

The only one in you future now is a Mk III or Mk IV. 

One PS, the 1D Mk II N is weather resistant but the 24-105mm is not.

Good luck!