cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

My next camera

idanidan123
Enthusiast

Hello guys, I have the 1100d almost 2 years, and 2 lenses. Now I want to step up to a full frame camera. I looked up CNET reviews, but I wanna be 100 percent sure so I need your opinion- I looked up reviews for the 70d and it looks like a pretty great camera, do you recommend it ?

FYI- I shoot landscapes and nature. I don't care about video mode at all, i'm all about photography.

Thanks in advance !

34 REPLIES 34

Before I purchased a Full Frame camera body, EOS 6D, I wanted a wide lens to photograph landscapes and cityscapes with a Rebel T5.  I chose the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM lens because it had a wider zoom range, and the front element did not rotate when the lens focused, which can be crucial for using CPL filters

 

3D8A0407.jpg

 

I shot the above photo, and then turned around and shot the two men fishing below.. 

 

The fact that the 10-22mm lens lacks IS doesn't mean much.  Not unless you're inches away from your subject, the angle of view is so wide that you're not going to notice slight camera motion blur until you start pixel peeping.  Besides, the 10-22mm was also slightly faster than the 10-18mm.

 

I bought the Full Frame camera, and I was back to square one.  I lacked an ultra wide angle lens.  I took a chance and purchased a Rokinon 14mm T/3.1 cinema lens.  Rokinon also makes a version for stills, 14mm f/2.8.  The lens works well on a full frame body, especially for capturing wide field pictures of the night sky. 

 

Some people complain that the lens is soft at the edges, in the corners, and that it vignettes more than they like.  I haven't found any of the images to be too soft, and like any ultra wide angle lens you will get some vignetting.  However, all of these issues are virtually non-existent on an APS-C body camera.

 

3D8A0401.Cropped.jpg

 

The above photo was shot with a 7D Mark II and the Rokinon 14mm T3.1.  I beleive the equivalent f/stop was about f/8.  The dark area in the center of the shot is how the scene appeared at the time.  It is not an artifact from the lens.  There was a severe weather front passing overhead.  The shot has been cropped to 16:9. 

 

IMG_3438.jpg

 

I love using the lens to capture shots of storm clouded skies, particularly with an APS-C body.  However, the above photo was a 2 second exposure taken with the 6D in near pitch darkness at first light of day as the sun lit the upper atmosphere, which provided the clouds with a backlighting.  I only used the 6D for its' low light capabilities.  As it turned out, I probably didn't need low light perfromace with a long exposure, but the clouds were literally racing cross the skes, and I wanted to keep the exposure as short as possible, to freeze the cloud motion.

--------------------------------------------------------
"Enjoying photography since 1972."

I think I forgot to mention that I don't work as a photographer, it's just a really strong hobby for me. I just got a quick hands-on from someone on the 70D and it looks like an awesome choice for my next camera. Just wanted to mention that


@idanidan123 wrote:

I think I forgot to mention that I don't work as a photographer, it's just a really strong hobby for me. I just got a quick hands-on from someone on the 70D and it looks like an awesome choice for my next camera. Just wanted to mention that


The EOS 70D iis a pretty good camera.  I suggest that you research it.  Just bear in mind that it is an APS-C camera body, not a full frame camera body. 

 

I posted some landscape photos that were shot with an inexpensive Rokinon 14mm prime lens.  One shot, the sunrise, was taken with a full frame camera body.  I think I get better shots using the full frame, ultra wide angle lens on the APS-C body than I do with an APS-C, ultra wide angle lens.  The shots are more rectilnear with less barrel distortion using the FF lens on the APS-C body.

--------------------------------------------------------
"Enjoying photography since 1972."

Is the 6D worth a shot ? Instead of the 70D ?

Also, these are some BEAUTIFUL shots dude !


@idanidan123 wrote:
Is the 6D worth a shot ? Instead of the 70D ?

Also, these are some BEAUTIFUL shots dude !

Thanks, I cheated a bit.  Those shots are not exactly "straight from the camera."  I used Adobe Lightroom to "develop" them from RAW files.  I used very little noise reduction.  The cameras do a pretty good job of NR on their own.

 

The 6D is a really great camera for taking still life photos.  It is not a good DSLR for shooting video, not even close by today's standards.  Neither is the 6D a good choice for action shots.  The 70D exceeds the 6D when it comes to video and action photography. 

 

Where the 6D really shines is in low light photos.  The sunrise photo is almost straight out of the camera.  The other two shots were taken with a 7D Mark II, and had contrast and color adjustments.

 

While the 70D is a great camera, if you're considering spending the money on a 6D, then you should also give the 80D a consideration.  It has a vastly improved AF system over the 70D and 6D. 

 

The 6D is a full frame camera body, which means that you will only be able to use full frame lenses.  Not all full frame lenses are expensive, as the above photos show.  I love my Rokinon 14mm, even though it is manual focus only.

 

 If you're looking at a 6D, then you're in the same price range as the 7D2.  Given the choice all over again, I would pick the 7D2 over the 6D.  At the time, I had figured I would continue shooting landscapes, just as I always had.  I used to travel a lot, so I took lots of photos of the sights, not people.  Now people want me to shoot their kids playing football, baseball, etc.

--------------------------------------------------------
"Enjoying photography since 1972."

idanidan123
Enthusiast
So what do you think is the best camera for me? I don't care about video, I sometimes take night shots, mostly landscapes and street and people. FF could be a really awesome experience, but starting with crop sensor is nice too. What would you recommend for me??


@idanidan123 wrote:
So what do you think is the best camera for me? I don't care about video, I sometimes take night shots, mostly landscapes and street and people. FF could be a really awesome experience, but starting with crop sensor is nice too. What would you recommend for me??

I can only say what I had thought was the best camera for me, and what I had thought was wrong.  As it turned out, I have begun using the cameras in ways that I hadn't expected, at all. 

 

I would rate the image quality of the 6D and 7D2 to be too close for my eyes to tell a difference.  The low light performance of the 6D will go unrealized without capable lenses. 

 

If you're just starting out, then I would suggest the 80D, which is actually more sophisticated than the 6D, but not quite as complex as the AF system in the 7D2.  The 80D seems to be a real performance leap over the 70D.

--------------------------------------------------------
"Enjoying photography since 1972."

I'm thinking about stepping into the semi-pro or pro DSLR. I'm pretty OK with complicated or sophisticated, I just want something better than what I have now. I own my 1100D for well over 2 years.

TTMartin
Authority
Authority
A lens upgrade would do more for you than a new camera. You have very old lenses that weren'the the best even when they were new. Lenses have progressed just as much as cameras.
Announcements