Tough decision on full frame camera purchase

[BobbyWasabi42]

Team,

I come to this forum to see if there is anyone that can help me get closer to my goal of purchasing a full frame camera. 

I currently have a 70D with an 85mm prime and a few other EF-s lenses. 

After some research I have concluded that I will be getting a 70-200mm 2.8  and a 20-70mm 2.8 (first version for both models) 

I have done research and even watched some youtube videos, but not could give me the opinion of someone who has actually used both on a regular basis. 

I'm hoping that someone in here has had the opportunity to have used both cameras.  I have the budget to get a 5D mk iii but I dont want to regret it if the 6D will suffice for what I need it for. 

I am aware of the differences,  the wifi/GPS,  the difference in size and weight and the camera molding. I know the focus points and how much more the 5D has

I work for a small magazine and do studio portraits but sometimes i do go out on my own and do photoshoots outdoors.  In terms of quality, every review I read said that the quality was pretty much the same. 

will I regret buying a 6D only find myself outgrowing it and then wanting/needing to pick up the upgrade?

I know its a very tough question to ask but any help you can provide will be greatly appreciated. thank you

[Waddizzle]

If you have a significant investment in EF-S lenses, then the 7D Mk II could be your best choice.

If you do want to step up to a full frame purchase, I think a better question would be choosing between all of the different 5D models, compared against the 6D.

[ScottyP]

As long as you are not shooting a lot of sports you could do fine with the 6d.  It even focuses a bit better than the 5d3 in low light.

 I would go that way for sure if you can take the savings on the camera and use it to upgrade to the Mk. 2 version of the 70-200.

[ebiggs1]

"will I regret buying a 6D only find myself outgrowing it and then wanting/needing to pick up the upgrade?"

This is impossible for anybody here to know!  Can you outgrow the 6D?  Certainly.  But will you?  That's up to you.

MPO, is the 6D is an afterthought.  Canon said, man we don't have anything below $3500 bucks in a FF so let's make something.  Lo and behold the 6D was born.  Again, MPO, I would skip it and go for the 5D Mk III.  It has to be made less than a 5d3 so it doesn't cost like a 5d3.  Also, IMHO, the 5D Mk III needs the battery grip to be truly complete.  So I would add it to the cost right up front.

[TCampbell]

I own a 5D III (and a 5D II) and I also own the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (version I) and the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM (also version I).

The lenses are amazing. 

Canon updated both 24-70 and 70-200 a couple of years after I bought mine but the differences weren't dramatic enough to make me want to sell my current lenses to buy the new versions.

As for the body... while both 6D and 5D III are full-frame bodies, the 5D is considerably more durable and has a significantly more technical focusing system.  The focusing system differences mostly give the 5D III a big advantage if shooting action photography.  It also has a more durable shutter.  The 6D should be able to lock focus in slightly less light (the 5D III can focus down to EV -2, the 6D can focus down to EV -3)

The 6D built-in GPS can drain the battery even with the camera powered off.  Disable it when not in use.  The 5D III requires a separate GPS module (the separate GPS module is a bit better than the built-in module and also provides compass data in addition to position fix data.)

[ebiggs1]

"Canon updated both 24-70 and 70-200 a couple of years after I bought mine but the differences weren't dramatic enough to make me want to sell my current lenses to buy the new versions."

Really?  Coming from you I find that most interesting?

[ScottyP]

Perhaps the most widespread folk wisdom in photography is to spend on glass first, and only secondarily on the body. Great glass on a budget camera will look great. Budget lenses on the most expensive camera will not look great. 

If if you have budget for both, fantastic.  If you can only afford to "go great" on one or the other, get the great lens. The 70-200 IS  f/2.8 L MK.2 is a visceral delight you really have to experience to understand.  

[RobertTheFat]

---

@ScottyP wrote:

Perhaps the most widespread folk wisdom in photography is to spend on glass first, and only secondarily on the body. Great glass on a budget camera will look great. Budget lenses on the most expensive camera will not look great. 

If if you have budget for both, fantastic.  If you can only afford to "go great" on one or the other, get the great lens. The 70-200 IS  f/2.8 L MK.2 is a visceral delight you really have to experience to understand.  

---

I have that lens, and I do understand. But the folk wisdom can carry you only so far. There have been many times when I've found autofocus accuracy and/or low-light performance to be greater constraining factors than lens quality.That doesn't happen to me nearly as often as it once did, but it took a couple of 7D's and a 5D3 to get me to that point.

So the bottom line is that if I were the OP, I wouldn't let anyone talk me into buying better lenses as a substitute for going FF. And if I did go FF, I'd spring for the 5D3 instead of the 6D, because of the 5D3's more sophisticated AF.

[ebiggs1]

Bob from Boston,

Scott said, "Great glass on a budget camera will look great make it better. But, Budget lenses on the most expensive camera will not  never look great." (slight corectons )

And I am a big subscriber to that theory.  However, in this case comparing a 70D to a 5D Mk III, I would recommend the 5d3, too.  If the reason for upgrading was simply IQ, which does seem to drive the amateur photographer's brain, I would go with Scott.  Get the glass!  The best you can afford.

[ScottyP]

Pretty sure there is no wrong answer here, only a collection of considerations for each shooter to ponder for themselves. One thing I found useful when I was buying was the different life span of cameras and lenses. Canon releases a new full frame camera every 3 years, approximately. A lens only gets upgraded every 10 to 15 years.  

Buying an expensive lens that is just a bit less than the lens you really want is a thing you may live with a very long time.  Conversely, buying the lens you really want can give you something that is useful and that you are happy with as being the best choice available for a really long time.

As both the 5d3 and the 6d are due to be replaced within the next 12 months, whichever camera body the OP purchases will be  not one (1), but two (2) models out of date within about 4 years no matter what. That may or may not be a big deal, but in 7 years each will be three (3) models out of date.  For me personally that would have be going for a new camera body in 7 years almost for sure. Or at least really wanting to.

If the camera is a compromise purchase, it is kind of moot in 4 years and quite moot in 7. If the lens selected is a compromise, it is perhaps a longer term nagging concern.