Ready to Upgrade...T2i to what?

[NSPhoto]

Hi guys! I'm ready to go BIG and upgrade from my current and first professional camera, the rebel T2i. I'm thinking the 6D, because the 5d3 is a bit too much for me. I'm just wondering if I should consider the 7D or go with the newer 6D?

[ebiggs1]

This is just a personal observation and opinion so please don't get too offended. I started photography in the late 50's.

That said I didn't always have pro level equipment either but I always wanted it. Eventually went to work at Hallmark Cards. A photographers dream job.

Now, IMHO, there are only two choices in pro level cameras, Canon and Brand N. (35mm style that is) Sony is not one.

It is more at the same level as your Rebel, or a 70D.

Secondly, except for the Canon 50mm f1.4, you don't have any pro level glass. So, my advice is get some "L" lenses and keep your Rebel for a while. Even the 70D is only a small step up, again IMHO. If you want to go FF right now and need an entry level camera, the 6D fills the bill.

But in the end the 5D Mk III is the real deal. If it can't do it nothing can, again IMHO.

I have no idea what your budget is but good glass is very expensive. And if FF is in your future, lenses are where it's at for you now.

How about a Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L II? Possibly the finest lens of it's type anywhere, period. It and a 5D Mk III is the dream outfit. 

[ebulington]

Actually, I agree on the 24-70 5dMIII set up.  I have the money to spend a lot more, but can't bring myself to do it as a hobbyist.  I appreciate the flexibility the used market allows these days, as I plan on using the proceeds from the sale of some of my lenses to purchase some of the new equipment.  When I bought most of my current equipment, I based it off of like-minded reviewers on sites such as Adorama (great service from those guys so far and I like their educational stuff).

I really need two cameras - one for my hobby and one for my wife (I have two other Canon point and shoots - the 300HS and the SX230HS (which makes a tremendous little travel camera considering the sensor size).  My wife's needs and mine only 

I guess I'm personall a snob when it comes to depth of field and image quality.  Please don't hate me.  I really want a 6D for that capability.  However, the performance of the 70D is interesting, so is the articulating screen (my wife, not me - I like the VF), and it takes advantage of all my current lenses.  No, they aren't great, but they are what I have.  I bought my first DSLR in 2010, so I'm pleased to have acquired these already, especially as a hobby.  However, the learning afforded by taking thousand of pictures and reading thousands of comments from folks such as yourself has me appreciating what you can do with really good glass.  But, I don't see the point in spending $5k+ on lenses to attach to a $400 camera.  Sort of reminds me of the people that drive $1,000 cars with $1,500 wheels.  The T2i is the best camera of the Txi range if you ask me, but it's still a Rebel. 

I'm leaning toward the 6D, but thinking about getting it with the 24-105 kit lens (which is an L!! lens by the way).  However, I'm curious as to why you think the 24-70L is so amazing.

Regarding the Sony comment, it's strictly for the form factor.  For a camera for my wife, to take good quality photos while still not being too heavy and having things like flip-out screens, power zoom, etc she is interested in that form factor.  I wish Canon at least gave me an option, but the SL1 is still about twice the size as the NEX, and the EOS M is as slow as my SX230HS...  If they made a $6-800 equivalent to the NEX 6 body, I'd be in the market (especially if I could use my current low cost lens set).  I don't mind her leaving it on the table with babies crawling around if it has a $50 lens on it... I don't want that to happen with the L glass!

[Skirball]

---

@ebulington wrote:

I'm leaning toward the 6D, but thinking about getting it with the 24-105 kit lens (which is an L!! lens by the way).  However, I'm curious as to why you think the 24-70L is so amazing.

---

Note that it's the 24-70 Mark II, not Mark I.  The II has fantastic resolution, even sharper than some primes at certain focal lengths.  And both give you f/2.8 compared to f/4 with the 24-105.  For those that put resolution paramount it’s hard to beat. Neither have image stabilization.

However, the 24-105 gives you great range, image stabilization, and standard thread size.  It’s a great workhorse lens. There’s many that beat it in different aspects, but the 24-105 is popular for a reason, it’s a terrific walkaround lens.

The 6D/24-105 is a great combo.

[ebiggs1]

I am not going to rehash all what I said, you have my advice and are free to take or not.

But I will respond to a couple points you offered.

"But, I don't see the point in spending $5k+ on lenses to attach to a $400 camera. "

Remember for most part the lens makes the picture not the camera. You are right, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear but you can certainly make it work the best it can. Lenses last, camera bodies don't.

"I'm curious as to why you think the 24-70L is so amazing."

Because I have one, not the fntastic series II but the older one. I try not to recommend equipment I don't have first hand knowledge of. I have used to newer one and can testify, it is amazing and, again IMHO, the best there is, period.

The other opinions you have are yours and you must do what you feel best. The 6D will serve you well and the 24-70mm f2.8 will make a great outfit too.

The ultimate dream out fit remains the 5D Mk III, 24-70mm f2.8 along with the 70-200mm f2.8. If you can stand the heat, this is what to get. This is top-of-the mark.

[ebulington]

Thank you both for your counsel and advice. I don't claim to know everything which is why I read and ask questions. Your input is much appreciated thank you.

[JoeDavid]

The 6D is a good camera if you know its limitations.  If you travel much, having the built-in GPS is great for geotagging images so that you know exactly where you took them later.  I have the 5DM3 with the external GPS which works well but is a hassle compared to the built-in one that runs off of the camera battery on the 6D.  If I don't need the more sophisticated AF of the 5D, I take the 6D every time.  It is a point for an argument but, to me from examining a lot of images from both cameras, the 6D has a slightly tighter noise pattern at the higher ISOs but it isn't enough of a difference that I'd choose it over the 5DM3 based on the slight difference.  With both of those cameras the silent continuous drive mode is great when you don't want to attract a lot of attention.

As for the 70D, I don't own one but I played with one at the Canon booth at Photoshop World back in September.  If you plan on shooting a mix of stills and video, it is by far the better camera for video.  The ability to touch the LCD to shift focus from one subject to another is outstanding; no hunting, just a smooth focus pull.  It was pretty impressive.  With the 5D and 6D you will pretty much have to manual focus with video.

JM2C

[Hawk64]

Hi, I know a few people have already commented, but that was over 3 years ago.

I have the T2i, which now has a cracked screen. As I live in the UK, no one wants to touch it. So I’ve decided to upgrade. As previously stated context

 I use my camera

          1, mainly for holiday and family memories 

          2, take lots of Sunsets and Sunrises

          3, money not really an object, but don’t want to spend unrealistic amount

          4, willing to buy new lenses if needed

thanks

[RobertTheFat]

---

Hawk64 wrote:

Hi, I know a few people have already commented, but that was over 3 years ago.

I have the T2i, which now has a cracked screen. As I live in the UK, no one wants to touch it. So I’ve decided to upgrade. As previously stated context

 I use my camera

          1, mainly for holiday and family memories 

          2, take lots of Sunsets and Sunrises

          3, money not really an object, but don’t want to spend unrealistic amount

          4, willing to buy new lenses if needed

thanks

---

With just those criteria on the table, I'd recommend the 80D. I've never used (or even seen) one, but there's enough information out there to give me confidence in that recommendation.

When the same question (replacement of my wife's T2i) came up for me two years ago, I bought her a 7D Mark II. But our criteria were slightly different, and the choices were different as well. (The 70D's reputation was drifting downwards then, while the 80D has an excellent reputation now.)

BTW, the T2i was a fine camera (and a great value) in its day. When I gave our daughter one of our surplus cameras last month, my wife made sure it wasn't her T2i!

[Hawk64]

Thanks Bob. Yes it’s a great camera. I only got it because I was on holiday and my Pentax broke. The insurance company told the shop to give me what whatever was available which was the T2i. If I was back in the Caribbean I’d just buy a new one

Thanks again

[ebiggs1]

"With just those criteria on the table, I'd recommend the 80D."

I second this.