New Camera Suggestions

[Yatys 93]

Hey all

 

Hope your all having a great holiday period!

 

Just after some opinions. I have a canon 1300D had it for years and starting to run into some issues with it, can only take 4 RAW photo's before its full and stops taking shots, video isn't really much of an option with it, I have been toying around with upgrading for a long time, and with plans for next year finally falling into place decided to take the plunge and do it, I have been looking at the 6D mark ii, however also thinking maybe mirrorless (either the R6 or the R5) hence the opinions here.

 

I can afford the R5 but it will be a very large chunk of my funds for next year, however if its worth it in the long run then its an option, obviously the R6 is very similar in terms of things it can do, all be it on a smaller scale, no 8K, no 4K slow mo, my main issue however is if you look just straight megapixel wise, its not really an upgrade to the 1300D (18 to 21) so I'm worried that loosing the crop factor of the 1300D will affect the wildlife shots I take, the R6 is a lot newer and a nicer so its not a direct comparison but its still something to bare in mind. Where as the 6D is still personally an option, I'd just loose a few of the video options, slow mo as a main one, I'd also not have to buy a lens adapter as my entire lens collection is EF.

 

opinions welcome, wanting to stick with canon as its what I know, not overly interested in the 5D as for me at least it doesn't offer much over the 6D for the price jump.

 

thanks all

[LIGISTX]

23 minutes ago, Yatys 93 said:

Hey all

 

Hope your all having a great holiday period!

 

Just after some opinions. I have a canon 1300D had it for years and starting to run into some issues with it, can only take 4 RAW photo's before its full and stops taking shots, video isn't really much of an option with it, I have been toying around with upgrading for a long time, and with plans for next year finally falling into place decided to take the plunge and do it, I have been looking at the 6D mark ii, however also thinking maybe mirrorless (either the R6 or the R5) hence the opinions here.

 

I can afford the R5 but it will be a very large chunk of my funds for next year, however if its worth it in the long run then its an option, obviously the R6 is very similar in terms of things it can do, all be it on a smaller scale, no 8K, no 4K slow mo, my main issue however is if you look just straight megapixel wise, its not really an upgrade to the 1300D (18 to 21) so I'm worried that loosing the crop factor of the 1300D will affect the wildlife shots I take, the R6 is a lot newer and a nicer so its not a direct comparison but its still something to bare in mind. Where as the 6D is still personally an option, I'd just loose a few of the video options, slow mo as a main one, I'd also not have to buy a lens adapter as my entire lens collection is EF.

 

opinions welcome, wanting to stick with canon as its what I know, not overly interested in the 5D as for me at least it doesn't offer much over the 6D for the price jump.

 

thanks all

I would definitely look at mirrorless. In todays day and age, imo, it makes no sense to go DSLR. I shoot nikon d850 and will eventually have a similar issue…. New glass or adapters. I have always told myself if I started over today, I’d probably go Sony. It may not be a horrible idea to look at a used a7iii and for the short term adapt your EF glass or start selling off EF glass for Sony’s mount (I forget the letter, E mount?). I have a lot of glass, so I know that sounds like a huge endeavor. But the portability of Sony gear is part of my reasoning as well… carrying around my d850 and say a 24-70 f2.8 is a heavy and large object. Also, Sony is sort of winning at almost everything right now anyways. Amazing sensors and good prices, just not weather sealed like a real pro body from canon, Nikon or fuji.

 

Beyond going “nuts” and going Sony, I would definitely look at mirrorless canon. Unfortunately we are in a transition period, but mirrorless is 100% the future and thus buying old tech seems like a waste and pointless. 
 

Hard choices I know… but all things to consider. Also trying to grab a used a7iii now that the iv is out may make a lot of sense. I had a a7iii and recently sold it with the kit lens for 1300 bucks, which honestly for that money is an incredible value; that camera rocks. But being a Nikon shooter I just had no real use case for it and wasn’t ready to make that switch as my d850 still satisfies all my needs very well - it’s just heavy and the glass is huge. 

[LIGISTX]

Also forgot to address the MP question. So, being that I shoot 45MP with my d850, I also mentally struggle with “oh man, less mp?!” But in reality ~20 MP is plenty unless your trying to crop in a lot or print a massive print. 

[Yatys 93]

1 minute ago, LIGISTX said:

Also forgot to address the MP question. So, being that I shoot 45MP with my d850, I also mentally struggle with “oh man, less mp?!” But in reality ~20 MP is plenty unless your trying to crop in a lot or print a massive print. 

I don't plan on cropping, but I shoot a lot of wildlife so sometimes you get what you get and if its not as close as you'd like then tough, over the summer I spent a week in scotland and get very lucky in finding a golden eagle, threw on the sigma 150-600 and took the shots I could get, however it wasn't close so I'd like to crop those down, however its just not an option on those images, as soon as you start to crop it gets very smudged out, so on the R6 that would be even further away and I wouldn't have much headroom to fix it ?

[LIGISTX]

3 minutes ago, Yatys 93 said:

I don't plan on cropping, but I shoot a lot of wildlife so sometimes you get what you get and if its not as close as you'd like then tough, over the summer I spent a week in scotland and get very lucky in finding a golden eagle, threw on the sigma 150-600 and took the shots I could get, however it wasn't close so I'd like to crop those down, however its just not an option on those images, as soon as you start to crop it gets very smudged out, so on the R6 that would be even further away and I wouldn't have much headroom to fix it ?

Honestly cropping in doesn’t do magic anyways. A few times I have cropped in pretty far on wildlife, but the real answer is having the correct glass for the job, or just being the correct distance. I have shot birds with my 500 and if they are small in the view finder, cropping in post doesn’t really do much. More MP certainly helps, but I guess what I am saying is it’s not a silver bullet. Proper composition/glass is much more important then being able to crop in post. 
 

This is iirc a 1:1 crop, and in this instance the extra MP did help as the hawk would be smaller if I didn’t have the MP…

 

 

This I believe is barely cropped:

the more you crop the less sharp it starts to look which is sort of obvious… but I guess my point is, I bet ~20mp is plenty of MP for 98% of shots. 
 

Plus the dynamic range of the newer sensors are just amazing. ISO handling and dynamic range is nuts. I did some shots for some friends and their newborn, my camera missed its metering as the sun was directly behind them so it ended up being multiple stops to dark. In the final edit it would be difficult to determine the camera missed at all. R5/6 and a7iii or any new mirrorless will give you these benefits, in addition to usually really good in body stabilization. I am not as familiar with canon, but I think? the 6D would offer the dynamic range and ISO capabilities as well? But still I’d recommend mirrorless. 

[Yatys 93]

16 minutes ago, LIGISTX said:

Honestly cropping in doesn’t do magic anyways. A few times I have cropped in pretty far on wildlife, but the real answer is having the correct glass for the job, or just being the correct distance. I have shot birds with my 500 and if they are small in the view finder, cropping in post doesn’t really do much. More MP certainly helps, but I guess what I am saying is it’s not a silver bullet. Proper composition/glass is much more important then being able to crop in post. 
 

This is iirc a 1:1 crop, and in this instance the extra MP did help as the hawk would be smaller if I didn’t have the MP…

 

 

This I believe is barely cropped:

the more you crop the less sharp it starts to look which is sort of obvious… but I guess my point is, I bet ~20mp is plenty of MP for 98% of shots. 
 

Plus the dynamic range of the newer sensors are just amazing. ISO handling and dynamic range is nuts. I did some shots for some friends and their newborn, my camera missed its metering as the sun was directly behind them so it ended up being multiple stops to dark. In the final edit it would be difficult to determine the camera missed at all. R5/6 and a7iii or any new mirrorless will give you these benefits, in addition to usually really good in body stabilization. I am not as familiar with canon, but I think? the 6D would offer the dynamic range and ISO capabilities as well? But still I’d recommend mirrorless. 

yaa my eagle pics were not even close to that  using a 600 on a crop sensor so effectively a 960mm ,admittedly the camera did miss the focus too which is partly why the crop isn't great, where as the R6/R5 have bird finding auto focus so might have nailed it better, we'll never know for sure, it is the R's I'm leaning towards, theyre also smaller for my travel plans so thats always a bonus

[LIGISTX]

7 minutes ago, Yatys 93 said:

yaa my eagle pics were not even close to that  using a 600 on a crop sensor so effectively a 960mm ,admittedly the camera did miss the focus too which is partly why the crop isn't great, where as the R6/R5 have bird finding auto focus so might have nailed it better, we'll never know for sure, it is the R's I'm leaning towards, theyre also smaller for my travel plans so thats always a bonus

If that’s what you got at 960mm…. No amount of MP would have helped lol.

 

Also, you can’t shoot multiple RAW images? Is your card to slow to write the data to it? Wouldn’t be worth investing in better stuff now if your looking to upgrade, but RAW is basically required if you want to shoot for real. 

[Yatys 93]

11 minutes ago, LIGISTX said:

If that’s what you got at 960mm…. No amount of MP would have helped lol.

 

Also, you can’t shoot multiple RAW images? Is your card to slow to write the data to it? Wouldn’t be worth investing in better stuff now if your looking to upgrade, but RAW is basically required if you want to shoot for real. 

no exactly, it was not a close shot at all, however thats my point, the canon crop factor is 60% so if I'd had the R6 that day and cropped down that much it would effectively have been a 13mp shot, where as the R5 would have been 28, more likely to still be useable, at least that my understanding of how that would work in theory at least?

 

ya the buffer limit on a 1300D is 6 RAW shots at 3 fps, however because I have the RAW and JPEG option enabled it drops it to 4-5 shots before the buffer is full, I am using a Sandisk extreme card, which is about as fast a card as this body supports from what I can find

[Kilrah]

A Sony A7R2 still works great and satisfies the MP requirement, should be available pretty cheap used by now.

[GDRRiley]

1 hour ago, Kilrah said:

A Sony A7R2 still works great and satisfies the MP requirement, should be available pretty cheap used by now.

thats going to struggle with wildlife for FPS at 5fps and has a small buffer

A7RIII is a bit better at 10fps

 

I'd go R6 and spend the money on glass, look at nikon Z6II as well or wait a few weeks and see what the new fuji bodies are like.

if your doing a lot of wildlife staying with a crop sensor will help you get more reach. Fuji got the 200mm F2 (305mm FF) with a 1.4x convert gets you to 420mm F2.8. and then the 100-400 zoom with 1.4x or 2x converters

[CommanderAlex]

3 hours ago, LIGISTX said:

I am not as familiar with canon, but I think? the 6D would offer the dynamic range and ISO capabilities as well?

6D Mark II user right here. Camera works great for stills/nature/portraits. I have yet to do some full-blown wildlife shots as it's cold here (but I'm sure there are some spots that I can travel to to see if I can get a good shot or two). ISO range is incredible. Some photos on the Rate the Photo Above You thread from me were shot with this camera. 

[Yatys 93]

43 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

thats going to struggle with wildlife for FPS at 5fps and has a small buffer

A7RIII is a bit better at 10fps

 

I'd go R6 and spend the money on glass, look at nikon Z6II as well or wait a few weeks and see what the new fuji bodies are like.

if your doing a lot of wildlife staying with a crop sensor will help you get more reach. Fuji got the 200mm F2 (305mm FF) with a 1.4x convert gets you to 420mm F2.8. and then the 100-400 zoom with 1.4x or 2x converters

with the exception of replacing the 17-40 f4L there isn't much glass I need, I'd like a tilt shift lens but that can wait, and nothing else springs to mind, I'm wanting to move to full frame, even though it will mean I'll loose that extra reach, as I want to do more landscape stuff, as well as astro work, one of the things I'm hoping to box off next year is a shot of the milky way over uluru, image attached is not mine and just the first one that came up on google.

[Yatys 93]

23 minutes ago, CommanderAlex said:

6D Mark II user right here. Camera works great for stills/nature/portraits. I have yet to do some full-blown wildlife shots as it's cold here (but I'm sure there are some spots that I can travel to to see if I can get a good shot or two). ISO range is incredible. Some photos on the Rate the Photo Above You thread from me were shot with this camera. 

are you mainly a stills person or do you do video as well? is there anything that makes you want to move to the mirrorless options?

[CommanderAlex]

Just now, Yatys 93 said:

are you mainly a stills person or do you do video as well? is there anything that makes you want to move to the mirrorless options?

I'm mainly a stills person. For video work, you're better off upgrading to one of the DSLR's the offer 4K video unless you want 1080p60. IIRC, that spot is reserved up to near the 1DX Mark II or III line, which is a couple thousand. 

 

Mirrorless is such a barrier to me as the cost for a body I cannot afford. I have some EF 'L' lenses so I'd have to get an adaptor like you would to adapt EF to RF mount. Things that I do not like with mirrorless over DSLR are: poor battery life, smaller bodies than DSLRs and I find them to be uncomfortable to hold, and also the satisfying sound of the shutter/mirror moving. I know mirrorless has the option to have a sound emitted to make it sound like a DSLR, but it's not authentic.

 

The DSLR is dead, but they make getting into photography reasonable from a cost perspective-especially if you're not doing it as a job/professional work, which is where I come in. As of right now, I'll possibly switch to mirrorless once my two DSLR's drop dead (6D Mark II and 7D Mark II).

[Yatys 93]

4 minutes ago, CommanderAlex said:

I'm mainly a stills person. For video work, you're better off upgrading to one of the DSLR's the offer 4K video unless you want 1080p60. IIRC, that spot is reserved up to near the 1DX Mark II or III line, which is a couple thousand. 

 

Mirrorless is such a barrier to me as the cost for a body I cannot afford. I have some EF 'L' lenses so I'd have to get an adaptor like you would to adapt EF to RF mount. Things that I do not like with mirrorless over DSLR are: poor battery life, smaller bodies than DSLRs and I find them to be uncomfortable to hold, and also the satisfying sound of the shutter/mirror moving. I know mirrorless has the option to have a sound emitted to make it sound like a DSLR, but it's not authentic.

 

The DSLR is dead, but they make getting into photography reasonable from a cost perspective-especially if you're not doing it as a job/professional work, which is where I come in. As of right now, I'll possibly switch to mirrorless once my two DSLR's drop dead (6D Mark II and 7D Mark II).

I want to play more with video which is partly why I started leaning towards the R6 or the R5, from what I have seen the R6 has the same sensor as the 1DX iii, I have a few of the EF L too, which is why the 6D stayed an option, the native support would be nice, however like you said I think the DSLR days are done, can't see anything at the top end coming out again, not sure what they will do with the entry level stuff though, be interesting to see, I have heard rumours that canon have a cropped mirrorless coming next year.

 

do you use the 6 or the 7 as the main?

[CommanderAlex]

Just now, Yatys 93 said:

I want to play more with video which is partly why I started leaning towards the R6 or the R5, from what I have seen the R6 has the same sensor as the 1DX iii, I have a few of the EF L too, which is why the 6D stayed an option, the native support would be nice, however like you said I think the DSLR days are done, can't see anything at the top end coming out again, not sure what they will do with the entry level stuff though, be interesting to see, I have heard rumours that canon have a cropped mirrorless coming next year.

 

do you use the 6 or the 7 as the main?

Yeah, I don't believe Canon has any more DSLR's in the enthusiast/professional range coming out anymore as they have devoted R&D to their mirrorless system. I did hear that rumor too on the cropped mirrorless camera coming out sometime next year from Canon. 

 

I use the 6D Mark II as my main camera. 7D I'll use if I need extra reach, so perfect with long focal length lenses like the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 or EF 100-400mm 'L'. 

[Yatys 93]

2 minutes ago, CommanderAlex said:

Yeah, I don't believe Canon has any more DSLR's in the enthusiast/professional range coming out anymore as they have devoted R&D to their mirrorless system. I did hear that rumor too on the cropped mirrorless camera coming out sometime next year from Canon. 

 

I use the 6D Mark II as my main camera. 7D I'll use if I need extra reach, so perfect with long focal length lenses like the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 or EF 100-400mm 'L'. 

guess I have some thinking to do, leaning towards the R series for the video, plus the 20fps on stills will come in very handy, however especially with the R5 its a lot to spend for something I'd don't intend to make money from when I have other more important things happening next year

[CommanderAlex]

5 minutes ago, Yatys 93 said:

guess I have some thinking to do, leaning towards the R series for the video, plus the 20fps on stills will come in very handy, however especially with the R5 its a lot to spend for something I'd don't intend to make money from when I have other more important things happening next year

You definitely do. Don't forget, depending on what smartphone you have, may be able to record at 4K so if you want to record videos of family and stuff, you can with that and reserve a high MP body for stills (I would not recommend this if you are doing this for professional work/making money off of). 

 

You can always buy a used body from a reputable seller to try and save some money.

[Yatys 93]

1 minute ago, CommanderAlex said:

You definitely do. Don't forget, depending on what smartphone you have, may be able to record at 4K so if you want to record videos of family and stuff, you can with that and reserve a high MP body for stills (I would not recommend this if you are doing this for professional work/making money off of). 

 

You can always buy a used body from a reputable seller to try and save some money.

I'm looking at used if I can find one with a decent shutter count, was hoping for a black friday sale but nothing major happened on any of the models I was after, my phone can do 4K, so that is also an option, I have no intention of going into making money from this, I like photography being my escape from everything, just being able to stick my airpods in and walk around for a couple hours just seeing what I can find

[CommanderAlex]

16 minutes ago, Yatys 93 said:

I'm looking at used if I can find one with a decent shutter count, was hoping for a black friday sale but nothing major happened on any of the models I was after, my phone can do 4K, so that is also an option, I have no intention of going into making money from this, I like photography being my escape from everything, just being able to stick my airpods in and walk around for a couple hours just seeing what I can find

Love it. Try checking out mpb as they will list the shutter count of camera's and price/condition, as well as actual photos of the item.

[Imbadatnames]

Depends on your lenses, if you’re willing to adapt them or buy new. Sony make some solid full frames if not the best atm and with the A7iv coming out the iii and it will drop in price. Or even look at the ARii. You lose the amazing low light performance of the S line but you gain resolution up to around 36MP I think. Personally use Fuji and they’re solid 

[GDRRiley]

I'd just adapt EF- to RF with the canon adpator. you don't lose anything by doing it and you gain the option of rear filters

[Yatys 93]

On 12/24/2021 at 8:49 PM, GDRRiley said:

I'd just adapt EF- to RF with the canon adpator. you don't lose anything by doing it and you gain the option of rear filters

ya this was my idea, nut I already own all the filters for my lens so was thinking of getting the control ring adapter instead, just need to decide on the body.

[YellowJersey]

You're coming from an APS-C camera, right? I'd probably think twice about the R5 and the whole "EF to RF adapter" route if you just have APS-C lenses since the R5 is a full frame camera and Canon's APS-C M-mount seems dead in the water. So, unless you have some good full frame glass that you'd be adapting onto an R5, then perhaps consider an R6 or another brand instead. I personally think the R5 (and R6 for that matter) are over priced for what you get.

 If you don't haven't invested a tonne of money into Canon full frame glass, then you've really got options. I'm just looking on TheCameraStore's website (in CAD) and the R5 body only is $5000; for that price, you could get a Sony A7rIII and two Tamron lenses. I know I have a bit of a reputation for being a bit of a sony fanboy due to my consistently recommending them, but the third party support from Tamron, Sigma, and others gives you a lot of flexibility. I just don't think the R5 is worth that kind of money.

[Yatys 93]

11 hours ago, YellowJersey said:

You're coming from an APS-C camera, right? I'd probably think twice about the R5 and the whole "EF to RF adapter" route if you just have APS-C lenses since the R5 is a full frame camera and Canon's APS-C M-mount seems dead in the water. So, unless you have some good full frame glass that you'd be adapting onto an R5, then perhaps consider an R6 or another brand instead. I personally think the R5 (and R6 for that matter) are over priced for what you get.

 If you don't haven't invested a tonne of money into Canon full frame glass, then you've really got options. I'm just looking on TheCameraStore's website (in CAD) and the R5 body only is $5000; for that price, you could get a Sony A7rIII and two Tamron lenses. I know I have a bit of a reputation for being a bit of a sony fanboy due to my consistently recommending them, but the third party support from Tamron, Sigma, and others gives you a lot of flexibility. I just don't think the R5 is worth that kind of money.

ya the 1300 is a APS-C on the EF-S mount, however bar the 18-55 that came with the camera my entire lens collection is EF and about half are from canon's L series and as I have mentioned above, I have pretty much all the bases I need covered from 17mm all the way out to 600mm, hence me still considering the 6D ii since my entire collection is native to it, or all only needs 1 adapter that can pretty much just live on the body since I won't have any RF lens to start with at least, I'll admit I haven't looked this up with regards to sony bodies but I also like the fact that every feature works with the RF-EF adapter, there's no focus issues or missing features like the eye tracking, plus from the research I have been doing the loss of the crop sensor giving me extra reach with the lenses is kinda gone since both the 5 and the 6 have no issues at all running a 1.4 teleconverter if push came to shove, although I don't have one and won't be rushing to buy one any time soon.