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

What should I upgrade to? + HELP

Seanac
Contributor

Whar should I upgrade to? + HELP

Hi guys, new member here. I currently own a Canon T6S (760D) and I mainly shoot aviation photography. I feel like I have outgrown the T6S and am thinking about selling it and purchasing a new camera. I would like to know if anyone has any recommendations on what camera body I should upgrade to. I want it to be reasonably “cheap”, under 1,000 dollars.

Also. I have read other peoples threads about what they’re upgrading to, and have seen people with the same camera as mine (T6S) getting recommended a camera with less megapixels. 
Now I know this isn’t the best thing for me to ask about.. because it makes me sound very inexperienced, but why are people recommending cameras with less megapixels to people who already have more megapixels? For example, a downgrade from 24MP to 20MP. I hope I don’t sound too dumb, but what are the perks to this? Is more megapixels not good?

These are my lenses:

Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM (My main lens)

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM

Canon 18-55mm Kit lens 

Thanks for the help, looking forward to the replies.

 

 

18 REPLIES 18

jaewoosong
Rising Star
Rising Star

What they are recommending is likely the 7D mark II which is a 20MP camera.  This sensor though having less megapixels is overall a better sensor when you compare the ISO range sensitivity.  With your existing lenses, you'll need a crop sensor camera.  You can find a lot of good condition used 7D mark II bodies on ebay for about $600 as folks are moving towards mirrorless systems.  If you can stretch your budget a bit (or find a sale), the 90D with 32MP may be the better choice.  Between the 7DmII or 90D, the 90D is the newer body.  Adorama sells used 90D for around $930.

example

your camera: 24 MP, ISO 100 – 12800 (expandable to H: 25600)

7D mark II: 20MP,  ISO sensitivity 100–16,000 (expandable to 51,200)

90D: 32MP, ISO 100-25,600 (expandable to 51,200)

R6 (mirrorless) 20MP, Native ISO range of 100 to 102,400; expandable to 204,800[3]

 


-jaewoo

Rebel XT, 7D, 5Dm3, 5DmIV (current), EOS R, EOS R5 (current)

Hi, the 90D is a bit expensive for my liking, and I have seen other people get recommended the 7d2. The main overall thing I want is better quality, and if I were to get the 7d2 then my quality would drop 4 megapixels. Is this true? Does the ISO rating make it better for quality and am I wrong?  I don’t know if upgrading to something with 4 less megapixels is a smart choice, but I also don’t know much on this topic, and I could be wrong. 

Thanks

"The main overall thing I want is better quality, and if I were to get the 7d2 then my quality would drop 4 megapixels."

Don't take this the wrong way, but it is clear to me that you need to take a Photography 101 course. You will learn plenty, believe me. Along the way, try to learn something about lenses if you are serious about getting "better quality." Good luck. 

jrhoffman75
Legend
Legend

"I feel like I have outgrown the T6S"

What isn't the T6s doing for you?. When you say aviation photography what are you shooting? High speed airshows, landings and takeoffs at an airport, photography of aircraft on display?

Either of the two DSLRs recommended by jaewoosong would be nice upgrades.

Mirrorless is the new technology, but so far all Canon mirrorless bodies are full-frame, so your EF-S lenses will be cropped on the R6 and images will be in the 10MP range. Current generation mirrorless bodies have viewfinder blackout which might be a detriment for rapid shooting.

John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X Mark III, M200, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, Pixma TR8620a, Lr Classic

Seanac
Contributor

First I’ll reply to John.

Hi John, what I mean by aviation photography is just documenting the unique aircraft that go into my local airport. We get a lot of fighter jets stopping in and we are an A-10 base. Recently some F-35’s (fast jets) visited to do training with the A-10’s. While they were here I got photos of their takeoffs twice. On both goes I feel like I missed A LOT of shots. I shoot RAW with an SD card and after a few shutter clicks (my camera is 5FPS) my camera slows down to 1.40fps. Also, maybe 65% of the shots I take are sharp, and the other 35% seem to be blurry or not sharp enough to my liking, and I miss a lot of great angles. I also feel limited to ISO200, as if I go above there is significant noise.  For example, when the F-35’s were taking off, they went straight out and began to turn right over me, providing an opportunity for some great photos of the topside of their jet (an angle aviation photographers love). When the jet turned, I already filled my buffer and was shooting about 1.40FPS, only one shot I got of the jet turning was a nice photo, I only got like 2 other frames of it turning and one of them was farther down after he turned over me, and the second one was soft.

I hope I explained that well.

I overall want to improve my quality and get more opportunities with a faster camera that doesn’t take SD cards, I hope to just be able to hold down the shutter button on RAW and capture every angle I see. 

Also, these jets get up fast and do some cool maneuvers here, so it’s not exactly like I’m just shooting an airliner taking off or landing (though I do sometimes).

Thanks John.


@Seanac wrote:

First I’ll reply to John.

Hi John, what I mean by aviation photography is just documenting the unique aircraft that go into my local airport. We get a lot of fighter jets stopping in and we are an A-10 base. Recently some F-35’s (fast jets) visited to do training with the A-10’s. While they were here I got photos of their takeoffs twice. On both goes I feel like I missed A LOT of shots. I shoot RAW with an SD card and after a few shutter clicks (my camera is 5FPS) my camera slows down to 1.40fps. Also, maybe 65% of the shots I take are sharp, and the other 35% seem to be blurry or not sharp enough to my liking, and I miss a lot of great angles. I also feel limited to ISO200, as if I go above there is significant noise.  For example, when the F-35’s were taking off, they went straight out and began to turn right over me, providing an opportunity for some great photos of the topside of their jet (an angle aviation photographers love). When the jet turned, I already filled my buffer and was shooting about 1.40FPS, only one shot I got of the jet turning was a nice photo, I only got like 2 other frames of it turning and one of them was farther down after he turned over me, and the second one was soft.

I hope I explained that well.

I overall want to improve my quality and get more opportunities with a faster camera that doesn’t take SD cards, I hope to just be able to hold down the shutter button on RAW and capture every angle I see. 

Also, these jets get up fast and do some cool maneuvers here, so it’s not exactly like I’m just shooting an airliner taking off or landing (though I do sometimes).

Thanks John.


Understood.

You will get higher frame rates and better focus tracking with the 7D Mark II. 

I wouldn't worry about 20 vs 24 megapixels as an absolute number. More important is the "quality" of the megapixels.

The 7DM2 will have better high ISO performance that the T6s.

I think upgrading to that camera is the correct move for you; it is a pro-level high speed action camera.

 

John Hoffman
Conway, NH

1D X Mark III, M200, Many lenses, Pixma PRO-100, Pixma TR8620a, Lr Classic

Sean,

I'm a little hesitant about replying, because I'm fairly new to photography, but to the best of my knowledge, all DSLR cameras use SD cards.

One of the most important considerations for for me was the weight of the camera. If I could, I'd like to make a pitch for the Canon T8i (850D). The T8i weighs 18oz. The 90D weighs 24oz, and the 7D Mark II weighs 32 oz.

One of your considerations would also be the processor speed. It's not just the fps, it's also how fast your camera processes those bursts. Your current camera has a Digic6 processor, the T8i has a Digic8 processor. Though the T8i only has 7 fps, 7 shots in one second is just about faster than I can think.

Steve Thomas

High end cameras use CF cards.

Hi, yeah as kvbarkley said high end cameras use CF cards which makes it capable for you to almost practically hold down the shutter on RAW and not have the FPS slow down.

The issue with my camera isn’t the FPS (which is 5) it’s that when I take a couple continuous shots, the shutter then slows down to 1.40FPS because the buffer is full.

Here’s a real world example, say a fighter jet is taking off, and I continuously shoot it once I begin to see it. My buffer then gets full while it’s still approaching me, and then while the jet is flying by me I only get two shots and I miss a ton of great angles all because my buffer got full from continuous shooting. Once I have continuously shot a few frames my camera slows down to 1.40FPS (Normally the camera has 5FPS but the buffer gets full)

 

I don’t know how to solve this because my camera doesn’t take CF cards and I believe my SD cards are too slow, but my SD cards are average and I don’t think I can get the same results I want (“long time” continuous shooting) without a CF card.

Hoping someone can maybe reply with a solution, or if I should just look into buying the 7d Mk2.

Thanks

Avatar
click here to view the gallery
Announcements