Stick with Canon or...?

[EdT]

I've been using my 60D for a while. It's good but like to move to full frame & get something new. 5D or 6D seems the obvious step, but is there another brand that better. Tried Nikon - didnt like the interface. Not tried any other.
Would mainly be stills, but plus to ability to hoot great video would be a benefit (with headphone socket & audio level bars)

[Gold]

What type of photography? And what (EF) lenses do you have already for the 60D?

[Swordman]

You can try Sony. It all depends on your budget, as these things can get very expensive, very quickly. I'd recommend the Sony A7r II if you're doing mainly stills with a bit of videography, or the A7s II if you're doing mainly low light work and videography.

[DibblyDobbler]

Why though Ed? I went 450D > 60D > 6D now happily back with 760D - I'd challenge any non pixel peeper to tell the difference in the pictures!

[RobDickinson]

In low light or for shallow dof, subtle foliage colour etc there are differences DD.

As for brands if you don't like Nikon interface then stick with Canon.

Sony interfaces suck balls.

[Swordman]

The Sony interface isn't as bad as some people make out. At the end of the day, all of the major controls have dedicated and customisable dials/buttons.

In my opinion, DSLRs have far more flaws, e.g no 4K video, no focus magnification, no focus peaking, poor dynamic range (Canon), and a bulkier, more plastic design.

[EdT]

Swordman said:

The Sony interface isn't as bad as some people make out. At the end of the day, all of the major controls have dedicated and customisable dials/buttons.

In my opinion, DSLRs have far more flaws, e.g no 4K video, no focus magnification, no focus peaking, poor dynamic range (Canon), and a bulkier, more plastic design.

I run Magic Lantern which enables a lot of that (not 4K though naturally!)
Thought what would you recommend to address all these out of interest?

[EdT]

DibblyDobbler said:

Why though Ed? I went 450D > 60D > 6D now happily back with 760D - I'd challenge any non pixel peeper to tell the difference in the pictures!

Curious.. why moved from 6D > 760D

[DibblyDobbler]

EdT said:

Curious.. why moved from 6D > 760D

Well it's a bit of a long story which I won't bore you with but essentially I realised that I could get results which to my eye were just as good with a camera which was smaller/lighter/cheaper - and the 760 is one of the first to get Canon's new 24Mb crop sensor, so (again for me) was the best Canon crop sensor camera.

Horses for courses really - depends what you are intending to shoot but my 2p worth is that a lot of amateurs go full frame when it's not really necessary (maybe the money would be better spent on lenses for instance).

[JustinP1]

RobDickinson said:

In low light or for shallow dof, subtle foliage colour etc there are differences DD.

Yes - I went from a 60D to 6D when it came out.

The DOF improvement is a benefit but the real difference is the medium and low light performance, especially at anything more than low ISO.

That said, if the OP only has the kit zooms, then there's plenty of benefit to be derived from better glass before considering a FF upgrade.

(As well as the fact that EFS lenses won't work on the 5D and 6D.)

Edited by JustinP1 on Friday 13th November 15:51

[DavidY]

JustinP1 said:

(As well as the fact that EF lenses won't work on the 5D and 6D.)

Correction for you EF lenses will work fine EF-S will not!!!

Absolutely agree about the low level light performance of the 6D, possibly the best Canon Camera in this respect (an advantage of having a large modern sensor with relatively few pixels)

But also agree with DD, if your photography doesn't require a FF sensor, then you don't need one! I shoot most of the time with an APS-C size sensor (Fuji mirrorless), but have a 6D for those low light shooting scenarios.

[DibblyDobbler]

DavidY said:

Fuji mirrorless

XT1? How do you find it David? Quite fancy one of these - good sensor + lenses review very well ...

[DavidY]

I started with an X100, was the only camera I took out the house, still hav eit can't bear to part with it, there is something special about the images from the Bayer sensor Fuji.

I then added an X-E1, pre-ordering an X-E2 at the same time. When the X-T1 was released I resisted it until last summer, bought one (sold the X-E1 and the bought an IR converted X-E1!!). I shouldn't have resisted as the EVF on the X-T1 is nothing short of amazing!!

I love the Fuji's for the whole tactile feel of taking a photograph. Currently I have

X100
X-E1 (IR Converted)
X-E2
X-T1

and a whole bunch of lenses. Optically the Fuji lenses are very good, even the plastic bodied 'kit lenses' are very good, and way above the standard of 'kit lenses' from Canikon. And some of them like the XF 56mm are simply stunning, with amazing colour rendition. I ahve a bunch of primes and several zooms, so I can suit my shooting needs.

But if you shoot fast moving objects or need a long telephoto, then the Fuji system is not for you.

Most of the pictures in my flickr are from the Fuji's, I've split it into albums so you can select just a a particular camera body. https://www.flickr.com/photos/89667368@N05/albums

But DD an X-T1 won't make you take better pictures than a 760D, sure the handling will be different.

[JustinP1]

DavidY said:

JustinP1 said:

(As well as the fact that EF lenses won't work on the 5D and 6D.)

Correction for you EF lenses will work fine EF-S will not!!!

Absolutely agree about the low level light performance of the 6D, possibly the best Canon Camera in this respect (an advantage of having a large modern sensor with relatively few pixels)

But also agree with DD, if your photography doesn't require a FF sensor, then you don't need one! I shoot most of the time with an APS-C size sensor (Fuji mirrorless), but have a 6D for those low light shooting scenarios.

Cheers for correcting the obvious typo!

I also agree with you as well. I've been looking at mirrorless APS-C for portability, or even the 100D as much of the time the difference will be negligible. However, there are certain times that the 6D is invaluable.

[DibblyDobbler]

DavidY said:

I started with an X100, was the only camera I took out the house, still hav eit can't bear to part with it, there is something special about the images from the Bayer sensor Fuji.

I then added an X-E1, pre-ordering an X-E2 at the same time. When the X-T1 was released I resisted it until last summer, bought one (sold the X-E1 and the bought an IR converted X-E1!!). I shouldn't have resisted as the EVF on the X-T1 is nothing short of amazing!!

I love the Fuji's for the whole tactile feel of taking a photograph. Currently I have

X100
X-E1 (IR Converted)
X-E2
X-T1

and a whole bunch of lenses. Optically the Fuji lenses are very good, even the plastic bodied 'kit lenses' are very good, and way above the standard of 'kit lenses' from Canikon. And some of them like the XF 56mm are simply stunning, with amazing colour rendition. I ahve a bunch of primes and several zooms, so I can suit my shooting needs.

But if you shoot fast moving objects or need a long telephoto, then the Fuji system is not for you.

Most of the pictures in my flickr are from the Fuji's, I've split it into albums so you can select just a a particular camera body. https://www.flickr.com/photos/89667368@N05/albums

But DD an X-T1 won't make you take better pictures than a 760D, sure the handling will be different.

Thanks David for the informative reply

The main appeal would be the slightly more compact dimensions, the lens range and the better sensor (the DR would well ahead of the Canon sensor in the 760 I reckon). And they look great

I don't shoot wide open very often, or at high iso, or fast moving objects. Occasionally use a 400mm prime for birds but not been doing much of that lately. Only worry would be macro - would need an adapter for my 100 prime and also need to establish if my MT24 flash would fire (manual only would be fine). Probably won't do it but mirrorless prime does seem like the way to go

[DavidY]

The 60mm Macro is very very sharp (possibly the sharpest lens) and a bit of a bargain s/h, but only a 1:2 Macro, but Fuji do make some extension rings, 11mm and 16mm I have both. Again excellent quality and AF works fine through them. http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/a... you can stack them as well. Zeiss 50mm is a 1:1 macro.

Fuji XF120mmF2.8 R Macro 1:1 Macro, telephoto lens due second half of 2016

Alternatively you can fit a wide range of manual focus lenses (just be aware that there is no manual aperture control on Canon EF lenses, so these are always effectively wide open). There are some neat EVF tricks for manual focusing including focus peaking, and zoom functions.

Obviously Raynox type adapters can be fitted to lenses as well.

A couple of test shots I took with stacked adapters (11mm and 16mm) on XF60mm. I'm no Macro expert!!!

[DavidY]

Oh and if into Macro the bigger EVF on the X-T1 will be much nicer than the smaller EVF on X-E2/X-T10

Canon flashes work fine on a Fuji-X series hotshoe in manual mode only

Edited by DavidY on Friday 13th November 18:26

[DibblyDobbler]

Thanks David, that really is food for thought! I have a Raynox 150 and 250 already (they are excellent) so lack of magnification would not be an issue.

A couple of former Canon shooters at work have switched to the X-T1 so I will try and have a play to see how I go

[Swordman]

EdT said:

I run Magic Lantern which enables a lot of that (not 4K though naturally!)
Thought what would you recommend to address all these out of interest?

Truth be told, I'm more of a stills shooter and only seldom use video. However, with the A7 cameras, you almost have to look at the A7S II as the video camera and the A7r II as the stills camera. The advantages that the A7S II has over the A7r II (and other cameras) when it comes to video are as follows:

Full pixel readout (no pixel binning)
Much better low light performance
Slog3 picture profile (although some may argue that slog2 is better in certain situations (no banding))
Gamma display assist (makes video look more contrasty when using slog (easier to focus with, etc)
HD video at 120 fps (A7rII can do 120 fps at 720p)
Not prone to overheating (neither is Canon)


As usual, these cameras have zebra and are limited to 30 minutes recording time. Naturally, it has image stabilisation, too.

I am utterly convinced, though, that unless you plan on making a documentary or a movie, this level of video hardware is overkill. If the thought of overheating (probably won't happen in England unless it's Summer), then the A7SII is the one to get, otherwise the A7rII as it's a much better stills camera.

[RobDickinson]

Honestly never touch the video buttons...