My next camera

[idanidan123]

So I've been using my 1100D since February 2015, and now I'm looking for my next DSLR. I only use Manual Mode, so is there a camera similar to the 5D Mark III, but at a much lower price ?

Any suggestions will be helpful 🙂

[TCampbell]

Just to add a few more comments on the 70D vs. 7D comparison.

The 7D has a 19point AF system in which all 19 points are "cross type" focus points.  The 70D basically inherited the same 19 point, all cross-type focus system with the only nuance being that the 7D allows you to use a reduced 'spot' AF size that the 70D focus system doesn't allow.  

The 70D has a fast burst speed -- but only just slightly behind the 7D.  But this is probably not important to you unless you are shooting action photography.

The 70D does have an articulated LCD screen -- and it's a capacitive touch screen display.  The 7D display is not articulated nor is it a touch-screen (not everyone loves a touch-screen but it seems to becoming popular so my guess is most people do like it.)

This sort of prompted the question of "is there really any point in getting a 7D when the 70D seems to have most of the features ... exceeds the 7D is some ways ... but costs less?"  

The 7D does have a physically larger body size and is built like a tank.  It has a magnesium alloy body -- metal, but a light-weight metal.  The 70D is polycarbonate (a "plastic" -- but a fairly sturdy plastic and the same as your current camera body.)

If you care about video, the 70D does a much better job than the 7D in the video category.  The dual-pixel AF system integrated into the CMOS sensor means that it can do continuous auto-focus while shooting video without needing to focus-hunt.  This is something very few other cameras on the market can do.  

The dual-pixel system works similar to the phase-detect AF sensors the camera uses when it is used for normal photography in viewfinder mode.   This means it runs light through a kind of beam-splitter (prism) that splits the light into "phases" and these "phases" will re-converge based on the focus distance.  With this system, not only can the camera tell if a point in the image is focused or not... if "not" focused it knows precisely which direction will focus the light (does it need to adjust focus to a farther distance or to a nearer distance) and it knows preciesely how much it needs to adjust focus.  This makes it far more accurate and faster than old "contrast detect" focus systems (they could tell based on a comparison of contrast (accutance) between two adjacent pixels if an image was focused or not... but if not it had no idea which direction to change focus or by how much... so it had to "guess" and after several iterations of "guessing" it would eventually find focus (this is casually called "focus hunt" where you see the camera guessing at different focus distances until it figures out which direction is improving and ultimately refines focus -- but it's slow.)   

Virtually all DSLRs use dedicated phase-detect sensors when used in normal viewfinder mode.  But in "live-view" mode most cameras on the market have to use that slower "contrast detect" focus system.  The 70D uses the much better dual-pixel AF system -- faster and more accurate.  The 7D came out long before Canon developed the dual-pixel AF technology so it doesn't  have this feature (again, the feature is ONLY used on the 70D when the camera is in "live view" mode).

When you look at features such as WiFi, dual-pixel AF, articulated capacitive touch-screen display, etc. the 70D has the benefit of having those features that only newer cameras tend to have.  None of these features, however, will help you take a better photograph in normal photographic mode using the viewfinder.  Essentially these just improve the usability of the camera -- not the photographic quality of the camera.  

[ebiggs1]

"The 70D does have an articulated LCD screen -- and it's a capacitive touch screen display."

Would not interest me in the least. Gimmicks IMHO.  But that's just me.  It does come down to are you a real landscape photographer or do you just like saying it?

[ebiggs1]

B form B,

"The fact that it's particularly suited to sports and action photography doesn't make it any less suitable as a landscape camera."

Possibly the only real fact stated so far.    The only camera body that truly excels at landscapes form anything listed is mine the Pentax 645Z Medium Format DSLR Camera.  Anything else will shoot landscapes about the same.

[idanidan123]

So you're saying that for my own uses, the 7D is probably my best upgrade ?

[ebiggs1]

Of course my medium format Pentax was meant tongue & cheek. Probably lost on most here but I can not see how you could be disappointed with a 7D or the newer 7D Mk II.  If you have the coin to spend get the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens with it.

[Waddizzle]

---

@idanidan123 wrote:
So you're saying that for my own uses, the 7D is probably my best upgrade ?

---

It really depends upon what you're looking for in an upgrade?  If you're looking for an ugrade in image quality, I don't think the 7D will give a significant improvement over your T5(was it?).  Performance-wise, the 7D body is a better built camera, and has a better focusing system, which would give you superior performance over your T5 for action shots   Similarly, I would not recommend replacing your current fully functional Rebel with another Rebel.  However, the 7D mark 2 would represent a big jump in performance and image quality.  It should give you top performance for years to come.

The Canon EOS cameras that have #0D model numbers are a significant ugrade in camera performance, moving you from the near point and shoot world of Rebel cameras, to camera bodies that contain some professional features, like AFMA.  One of these cameras would represent an upgrade,especialy the latest one out of the gate, the 80D.  The 70D was the predecessor to the 80D, and can be found at discounted prices.  At the current discounts [on the 70D], I would still go for the 80D.

The EOS 6D is probably the camera best suited for the photographer looking for excellent image quality, but without many of the bells and whistles found in the high performance cameras.  The 6D is a basic, bare bones camera with excellent low light performance, one of the best low light DSLR performers that Canon has made.  The full frame sensor will give you excellent images, PROVIDED that you give it lenses capable of capturing those images.  Canon's "L" Series lenses are highly recommended with this lens camera.  The 6D is the ideal camera for the non-professional to put on a tripod, and capture static images of still life.  One could almost describe it as a point and shoot full frame camera, but it is smarter than that.

Research the specifications on the cameras yourself, so that you can ask better informed questions.  You want to spend a significant amount of money.  Don't rely solely on the words of others.  Educate yourself, get better acquainted with your current gear, as well as the gear you're considering to buy.  Canon makes a variety of cameras for a reason.  Learn about what those reasons are.

[RobertTheFat]

---

@idanidan123 wrote:
Is there another camera, similar to the 6D but more affordable ?
I know I said money isn't really the issue here, but still. Any suggestions will be helpful !

---

To paraphrase a well-known American politician, it depends on what the meaning of the word "similar" is. The 6D is sort of a transitional camera, the one you buy if your objective is to "go full frame". It has a full-frame sensor and excellent low-light performance, but in virtually every other respect there are are APS-C ("crop frame") cameras that are better and/or cheaper. So if you'd be satisfied indefinitely with a crop-frame camera (of which there are many, ranging from entry-level to professional quality), the 6D is probably not the camera for you.

If you don't entertain full-frame ambitions, the nearest crop-frame equivalent in features and quality is probably the 80D. If its price is beyond your budget, there are several members of the Rebel series, priced pretty much according to what features are included. Just do a side-by-side comparison and pick the one that most closely meets your functionality and budget constraints. It's hard to go very far wrong.

Lenses are a similar story. Canon's full-frame lenses are generally excellent (and will work on any Canon DSLR), but can be very expensive. Their crop-frame lenses range downward from very good to rather crappy, the crappier ones usually being the cheapest. Again, pick what you can afford from the available types (standard, telephoto, wide-angle, etc.). If you have no clear idea what you want, a cheaper lens is a way of keeping your options open, since you're putting less money at risk.

[TCampbell]

If the 6D is basically what you want, but beyond your budget, then look for a used 5D II (hopefully with a reasonably low shutter count.)

A 5D Mark II sold as a "body only" would typically include the camera body (& dust cap), neck strap, battery charger, battery, and the USB and video cable.  It will typically not include the memory card (CF card).  

This would typically sell (used) for anywhere from roughly $800 to roughly $1200 depending on the condition of the gear and the type of seller (private seller vs. a commercial re-seller such as a camera store).