Does spending more mean getting less?

[Cindy-Clicks]

Unlike a lot of my colleagues in the field, I stayed with my T3i until I proved myself worthy of an upgrade.  But now that I decided to get a "better" camera, I am finding that spending more money means I am getting less performance.  Why is that?   I decided to buy a Pentax K-3, but eventually returned it because it did not give me the flexibilty I wanted.  I decided to put off buying another crop sensor camera for now, so I bought a 6D with a 100mm Macro L-glass lens.  My old T3i with a Tamron 28-300 zoom still produces much better images under the same conditions. What gives?

[Cindy-Clicks]

Sometimes I just wish I could sit down with the designers and tell them everything I want in a camera and have them get to work on it.  I basically need about three different cameras to do all the types of shooting I do.  I live in the midwest and other photographers will say to me, what is there to shoot around here?  I am like, are you  kidding me?  I see everything, and if I don't, I create things to shoot.  I think the artistic types approach photography in a different way.  I would just like more convenience and less hassle with all the techno stuff.  I mean I want an impeccably sharp image but sometimes I wonder if it is worth all the sacrifice to keep up with the technology.  I wish I could keep the same camera for 25 years like my OM-1.  But we live in an age of disposable goods and the camera companies want to make money too.  

[ebiggs1]

" I live in the midwest and other photographers will say to me, what is there to shoot around here? "

I did an article once a long time ago, entitled "All you have to do is look!"

[ebiggs1]

In addition to what Tim has said, you must compare camera to camera and lens to lens.  You must use the same lens/camera set-up.  Not one camera with a Tamron and the other with a Canon lens.  Comditions must also be exactly the same.

It is a possibility you have a lens, the Canon 100mm, that has a problem.  You will never know if you don't test exactly the same.  Apples to apples thing!

There are a couple guys, and me, here on the forum that will gladly help and answer any questions you may have.  We all share a love of the hobby.

My personal opinion is, with the exception of a very few off brand lenses, Canon lenses are way better than the 3rd party stuff.

Canon does not reveal how it makes lenses work on it's cameras.  All third party makers, reverse engineer the lens to where they think it will work.  By far the most of them fail and are not worth much.  Plus they usually have poor customer service or repair.  This is my personal opinion but it leads me to think there is no way that Tamron is besting your Canon EF 100mm L Macro.

Let us know how it goes with more shots.

[Cindy-Clicks]

Thanks,  I will definitely put it to the test.  I did try a quick test today on some printed lettering and it appeared the Canon lens was sharper, but I will do a bunch more testing in a variety of circumstances comparing apples to apples.  At this point I am hopeful it will work out.  The 6D is definitely more of a professional level camera. 

[cale_kat]

Kudos.