I've been going back and forth the past few days between getting a 6D(mk I) or an 80D and I'd love some help. I can get either and glass for about the same price I've found and now I can't decide.
The biggest thing I'm debating is full frame. The 6D is so tempting with full frame, but I feel that buying a 6D would just make me want the 5DmkIII (or IV) even more, especially if the AF is as bad as I've heard. If I go with an 80D, I can have a lot of great features, most of which the 6D lacks (better AF, more MP, 60fps at 1080p, etc.). From reading reviews, it seems that the 6D just isn't worth it and a lot of people just jump to the 5D line. Would a 6D vs 80D be like a subpar FF camera vs. a really good crop sensor camera?
A little about me, I'm a portrait/still-life/landscape photographer and videographer. I've been using the T5i for about 4 years now (laugh all you want, I know it's a Rebel and I need an upgrade). Not doing anything crazy nor am I a snob for cameras, but I'd like to get some informed opinions (thus the post).
In conclusion, in your opinion would the full frame capability of the 6D outweigh the features/capabilites of the 80D even though it's a crop sensor? I will eventually go for a 5D probably around the Mk V or VI in the coming years and hop into 4K/full frame, and I think the 80D will give me some time to collect some good FF glass to make the jump.
Again, they're around the same price (from my sources), so it's really down to full frame vs features like quicker AF and smaller size and more MP and whatnot. I also recognize the 80D is a newer model than the 6Dmk1, so that's also makes me lean towards it.
Let me know what you think! Thank you so much!
What about a 7D Mark II?
There is nothing wrong with the AF system in the 6D. It just does not have an abundance of AF points, that's all. The 80D produces remarkably low noise images that are better than a 7D2, probably due to in-camera processing. But, the 6D has the full frame field-of-view and depth-of-field.
The still life photos and landscape shots are top shelf with a 6D. The 80D is not far behind it, though.
If you are into video, then you definitely want the. Dual Pixel AF in the 80D. The 80D can focusing dynamically while shooting video, which the 6D cannot do.
Thanks for your response.
I honestly didn't think about the 7Dmk2, and now it's in the running. I'm worried about cost mainly. For $1500 I can get the 80D and put the extra $500 towards some decent glass, or I could spend $1500 on a 7Dmk2. The 80D has the 7Dmk2 beat on MP, but the uncompressed video and more autofocus points is tempting. However knowing this is a stepping stone to full frame, I don't know if spending that extra $500 on the 7Dmk2 is worth it for the time being. I work at a marketing firm and we use a 5DmkIII and an 80D as our video cameras, that is why I considered the 80D in the first place. I think with good glass, the 80D and 7Dmk2 won't have as big of a difference, at least to my eye or with my needs.
Focusing during video isn't as important to me believe it or not. I set my focus then lock it most of the time, even the best autofocus isn't great while recording.
I think I'd choose the 80D over the 7Dmk2 simply because it's smaller, cheaper, and better for video. If I weren't planning on going full frame any time soon I'd go with the 7Dmk2, however most of the "pro" features of that camera I simply don't need right now. 80D is more versitile, the built in WiFi and movable LCD touchscreen are huge as well.
Thank you for the suggestion though! I had discounted the 7Dmk2 because one of my friends had the 7Dmk1 and wasn't the biggest fan.
Having been through the conversion myself, I've come around to the view that if you plan to go full-frame eventually, it's better to just go ahead and do it. Yes, you can stay with a crop camera and start accumulating FF lenses, but those lenses are invariably a bit too long for their intended purpose on a crop camera. And the much better low-light performance of a FF camera is worth a lot. When the 5D Mark III came out, I was irked by its high price, so I bought another 7D instead. But if I had it to do over again, I think I'd bite the bullet and buy the 5D3. I did finally get a 5D3 a couple of years later after the price came down a bit, and since then the second 7D has seen little use.
I will admit that my experience may be atypical. I was never a full-time photographer, but for the last few years before I retired, photography was part of my job. A lot of it was event photography, which required two cameras, hence the two 7D's. But a 7D and a 5D3, with appropriate lenses for each, proved to be just as effective. Your situation is probably much different from mine; but if I were in your shoes and yearned to go FF, I'd probably look for a refurb 5D3. (I've never been enamored of the 6D, for some of the reasons you cited.)
As Ernie Biggs is fond of saying, that's just my 2¢ worth.
I agree with Bob. If you wish go to FF in the future, don't spend money on another crop sensor body. I'm going to ignore the just recently announced 6D2, but not yet released.
But, the 5D3 is for professionals on a budget. The 6D is for hobbyists without a budget. The 5D is an all-purpose workhorse, that can do most any task very well. The 6D lacks the sophisticated AF systems for action photography, but it holds its' own ground when it comes to image quality.
The 5D3 and 7D2 have better body builds than a 6D. But, the 6D has better low light performance, and larger pixels on the image sensor. I think the resolution, detail, and dynamic range of the 6D is pretty awesome. Prior to the 80D, I've felt that it was the best bang for your buck Canon DSLR.
The biggest knocks against the 80D, over a 6D, are the physical limitations of an APS-C sensor. The best Canon lenses are designed for FF bodies, not APS-C bodies. Just my two cents.
I am not big on video, so I would choose a 6D over an 80D. My son is big on video, so he preferred an 80D over the 6D. If you want the best of both worlds, stills and video, go for the 5D Mark IV. Yike, price hike!
Thank you so much for your response!
The issue with going full frame is it does cost a lot, and honestly I don't have the cash right now. Yes I'm a little worried about the jump and using full frame lenses on crop sensors, however I think I'm looking for a camera now that will get me the cash flow to afford something in the 5D line. I think going with a 6D now I'd end up with full frame images, but the lack of features, apparently crap autofocus (at least less points than the 80D), and less MP than the 80D it just wouldn't be worth it. When I go full frame, it'll be with at least a 5Dmk3, probably around a 5Dmk5 when it's eventually released.
I work for a marketing firm and we use L series lenses on a 5Dmk3 and an 80D interchangably, and I definitely notice the extra zoom on the 80D footage but it's not as bad as I once feared. I think I need one more step before full frame, then I'll try to sell my 80D off and go for the 5D goodness.
I looked into refurbed 5Dmk3s and there weren't any that were worth my time for less than about $1900, where I can get an 80D for less than $1100 (after selling my T5i around $950). I'd also rather have an 80D with good glass than a 5Dmk3 with some sub-par glass, at least on my current budget. Also taking into account my experience working in a 5Dmk3 + 80D shooting situation, it isn't as bad as one might think.
My (5ish maybe year) plan as of this moment is:
-Purchase an 80D body
-Purchase the Canon 24-70 2.8L (or similar from different brands)
-Purchase a 5D body (whatever is newest or maybe one generation behind)
-Either keep the 80D if I need a second body or sell it off.
Thank you so much for your thoughts!
I own a 6D and I will say that 98% of the AF system bashing is simply regurgitation of the crap written on the internet by people that don't even own the camera.
I use mine a great deal for birds in flight and wildlife and I don't miss much. It locks and tracks beautifully. I will say too, coming from a 600D that it took a while for the 6D and I to get used to each other. And that, to a degree, is true with any equiment change.
My point being, don't listen to the garbage you read regarding the 6D's 'poor AF' system because it is just not true. To those that have used the 6D and still say the AF system is poor I would say they don't know how to use it. If you have to depend on AF points all over your viewfinder to be able to shoot any kind of action then I guess you just need to become a better photographer.
"... I will say that 98% of the AF system bashing is simply regurgitation of the crap written on the internet by people that don't even own the camera."
I totally agree. It happens a lot doesn't it? Not simply about the 6D but in general.
Indeed it does.
What makes it even more interesting is when you own and use the camera being bashed. I read this garbage and I think....'gee, I must have gotten the only 6D with a good AF system. How lucky I am.'