03-02-2015 06:10 PM
Have off-loaded my 5DIII for smaller, lighter gear. Choosing between the 6D and 7DII. 95% of my shooting is vacation, landscape, family, but occasionally shoot daytime professional baseball with a long lens (Tamron 150-600mm probably). My main lens is the 24-105 L. I'm striving for max IQ, small size and light weight which all seem to favor the 6D. Is there a noticeable difference in IQ between the two sensors? I recognize the 7DII is a beast for action, but imagine the 6D could probably handle the occasional ball game? Any informed opinions are welcome as I live in a rural area and can't check the cameras out in person locally. Thanks for any input.
03-03-2015 12:47 PM
The wegith difference between a 5D III and 6D is 195g (.43 lbs). This is based on CIPA measuring standards which require that one battery must be installed and the recording medium (memory cards) must be installed (take those away and it weigh a little less.)
This makes the 6D body about 20% lighter than the a 5D III body.
The weights are:
5D III 950g
7D II 910g
You can see by this that the 7D II isn't much lighter than a 5D III... only 40g (that's less than 1/10th of a pound). In other words, the 7D II difference in weight is so insignificant that if the main reason for the switch is the weight... don't bother.
BUT... that's without the lens... and the lens is really significant.
The Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD lens weights in at 1951g (the 5D III body weights 950g). That puts your lens at nearly 2kg (it's 4.3 lbs).
Add it up and the 5D III plus that lens weighs 2901g (nearly 3kg -- it's actulaly 6.4 lbs) and by switching to a 6D body you'll shave off .43 lbs and still weigh about 6 lbs.
In other words... the weight of the body isn't really a big deal compared to the weight of the lens. You probably wont notice much difference.
My advice would be to look for a comfy "sling" style strap. When I used a traditional neck strap, the weight of a full-frame body with a heavy lens would get to if I had to wear it on my neck for more than a few minutes. But once I switched to a sling style strap... I happily wear my full-frame body and big heavy lenses and I walk around all day with this on and it doesn't bother me. A comfortable strap makes a BIG difference in your perception of weight.
I use a Black Rapid strap and they're probably the most common among the sling type straps. The strap is worn over one shoulder and the camera rests on your hip on the opposite side from the shoulder. It's never on your neck.
The 5D III and 7D II certainly have the better focus system. For most shots (vacation, landscapes, family, etc.) you wont really care about the focus system. If you're shooting sports... or any fast moving action, the better focus system certainly has an advantage.
As for image quality... the difference in image quality is almost entirely in the lens and not the sensor.
03-03-2015 05:20 PM
So many people get caught up in the, this camera is best for this and that one is best for that. Truth is any camera will take any picture. Yes, some do excel in certain areas but for the vast majority of us, there is slight difference.
Neither the 6D or the 7D Mk II, which very closely resembles a 5D, is going to have a real noticable weight difference.
You said, " I'm striving for max IQ, ...". You had the best camera, the 5D Mk III, for IQ between your stated choices. But here again the difference is going to be slight.
"Is there a noticeable difference in IQ between ..." This only you can answer.
However, I see the 6D as a watered down 5D, so I am going to favor the 7D Mk II, IMHO of course. It and the Tamron 150-600mm lens should be fantastic together.
03-03-2015 05:51 PM - edited 03-03-2015 08:44 PM
You likely won't notice a difference between the 5d3 and 6D unless you're a serious pixel peeper or you're really cropping a lot. They're very similar with regards to IQ. The one main area where you see the biggest difference is in astrophotography, and it's the 6D that is markedly better.
In bright daylight you likely won't see much difference between the 6D and 7d2 either, but at high ISO the 6D is about a full stop better. Depends on what you shoot, and your tolerance to noise.
You seem to mostly shoot static subjects, so I'd think the 6D would be a good fit. THe AF isn't terrific, but when I think of baseball I don't really think of action, I'd think it could be ok. The 7d2 of course would be better, unless you need high ISO to freeze the action.
If weight is truly that influential perhaps you should look at the Rebel line, especially considering that crop cameras like the Rebel can use smaller lenses than a full frame camera. But at that point you're really trying to shave off ounces. If it's that important, I'd get a nice compact camera for travel, and pull out the big guns for baseball.
03-03-2015 09:47 PM
03-04-2015 08:41 AM
I have the 6d and it shoots kids soccer just fine. 95% of my shooting is not sports, and I really like the full stop better low light/high ISO performance.
I totally agree, but I try to remain unbiased when recommending cameras, and the 6D really isn't an action camera. It suffices for my use, but I'm ok missing a shot here or there, or not having a 10 fps sequence of some interaction. I understand why professionals selling those photos would want that, but it's a stretch to believe you need it for capturing pictures of your kids playing sports.
03-10-2015 11:35 AM
03-10-2015 11:52 AM
03-10-2015 12:16 PM
03-10-2015 12:20 PM