Canon 6D?

[Skywise]

I currently own a Canon T4i with the EFS 10-22 and EFS 17-55 lenses.

I was out at DisneyWorld over the summer (for the first time) and had managed to snag tickets for the Wishes Dessert party and got some spectacular video of the Castle Projection show with the 17-55. I video'd at one full stop down. Got some noise in the unlit parts, but great color and lighting on the shot itself itself. (Except for a dumb tree that blocks the front of the castle!)

For Wishes I shot video with the 10-22 at about the same settings (maybe half a stop down more) - I was too close to the castle to get the entire scope of the fireworks so went with the wider angle which was a good assumption. On the downside the video is much noisier. I was able to clean some of this up in Lightroom but the castle ends up being a colorful... castle shaped blob.

I'm going back for Christmas and planning on videoing the holiday fireworks show but would like to get some better results. I can try getting far enough back and just videoing with the 17-55 but I've also always wanted to upgrade to a full frame camera and I'm thinking the 6D plus the 16-35 f2.8 ii might fit the bill.

Obviously I'll get better quality but am I going to get better quality for what I'm looking for (and for the cost... I'm going to have to cannibalize all my camera equipment to make the jump and still kick in extra) (There are also rumors of new lenses coming out next year which might include another EF-S wide angle lens at f2.8)

I'm a hobbyist/amateur and the majority of my photo'ing is travelling and generally low light stuff.

 

[SkaGoat]

I currently own a Canon T4i with the EFS 10-22 and EFS 17-55 lenses.

I was out at DisneyWorld over the summer (for the first time) and had managed to snag tickets for the Wishes Dessert party and got some spectacular video of the Castle Projection show with the 17-55. I video'd at one full stop down. Got some noise in the unlit parts, but great color and lighting on the shot itself itself. (Except for a dumb tree that blocks the front of the castle!)

For Wishes I shot video with the 10-22 at about the same settings (maybe half a stop down more) - I was too close to the castle to get the entire scope of the fireworks so went with the wider angle which was a good assumption. On the downside the video is much noisier. I was able to clean some of this up in Lightroom but the castle ends up being a colorful... castle shaped blob.

I'm going back for Christmas and planning on videoing the holiday fireworks show but would like to get some better results. I can try getting far enough back and just videoing with the 17-55 but I've also always wanted to upgrade to a full frame camera and I'm thinking the 6D plus the 16-35 f2.8 ii might fit the bill.

Obviously I'll get better quality but am I going to get better quality for what I'm looking for (and for the cost... I'm going to have to cannibalize all my camera equipment to make the jump and still kick in extra) (There are also rumors of new lenses coming out next year which might include another EF-S wide angle lens at f2.8)

I'm a hobbyist/amateur and the majority of my photo'ing is travelling and generally low light stuff.

I personally think the step you should take is pick up a faster, wider, lens first.

Sigma just announced a 18 - 35 mm f1.8 which will be a pretty nice lens for not bad money.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/967344-REG/sigma_18_35mm_f1_8_dc_hsm.html

then put that on your T4i and go out and shoot video of a lit building at night, and see how the noise looks... if it's still unacceptable then look into moving up to the 6D.

 

[bob100]

I currently own a Canon T4i with the EFS 10-22 and EFS 17-55 lenses.

I was out at DisneyWorld over the summer (for the first time) and had managed to snag tickets for the Wishes Dessert party and got some spectacular video of the Castle Projection show with the 17-55. I video'd at one full stop down. Got some noise in the unlit parts, but great color and lighting on the shot itself itself. (Except for a dumb tree that blocks the front of the castle!)

For Wishes I shot video with the 10-22 at about the same settings (maybe half a stop down more) - I was too close to the castle to get the entire scope of the fireworks so went with the wider angle which was a good assumption. On the downside the video is much noisier. I was able to clean some of this up in Lightroom but the castle ends up being a colorful... castle shaped blob.

I'm going back for Christmas and planning on videoing the holiday fireworks show but would like to get some better results. I can try getting far enough back and just videoing with the 17-55 but I've also always wanted to upgrade to a full frame camera and I'm thinking the 6D plus the 16-35 f2.8 ii might fit the bill.

Obviously I'll get better quality but am I going to get better quality for what I'm looking for (and for the cost... I'm going to have to cannibalize all my camera equipment to make the jump and still kick in extra) (There are also rumors of new lenses coming out next year which might include another EF-S wide angle lens at f2.8)

I'm a hobbyist/amateur and the majority of my photo'ing is travelling and generally low light stuff.

if the majority of your pics are "low light stuff" then the 6D would definitely help there and Canon seems to be discounting that model lately (less than $1,300 refurbished) It's also true a faster wider lens would help (sig 18-35 1.8) or a maybe a large aperture prime
So it comes down to how much you want to spend on this amateur hobbyist thing!

 

[Frantasmic]

I have my eye on a 6D too.

Generally, the reviews say that if you want Canon 5D Mk III type photos for less money, then the 6D is a good deal.

If you want Canon 5D MK III type video, the 6D isn't your camera.

So, if you prize photography over video, the 6D is probably a good choice if you cannot afford the 5D. If you want the comprehensive package of great photos, excellent low light capability, wonderful AF and video, then pony up the extra money.

 

[havoc315]

if the majority of your pics are "low light stuff" then the 6D would definitely help there and Canon seems to be discounting that model lately (less than $1,300 refurbished) It's also true a faster wider lens would help (sig 18-35 1.8) or a maybe a large aperture prime
So it comes down to how much you want to spend on this amateur hobbyist thing!

Less than $1300? Sheesh... if I was a Canon shooter, I'd jump at that. I really wish Sony had a fullframe in that price range.

 

[HPS3]

Less than $1300? Sheesh... if I was a Canon shooter, I'd jump at that. I really wish Sony had a fullframe in that price range.

My 6d should be waiting on me when I get home. I was going to try the A7 but the lack of AF lenses plus the cost of e mount turned me away. I ended up ordering a 6d refurb for $1330 after tax. I figured at that price I could try it out plus it has a 1 year Canon warranty. If I was going to shoot a lot of video, I think the A7 would be great.

 

[havoc315]

My 6d should be waiting on me when I get home. I was going to try the A7 but the lack of AF lenses plus the cost of e mount turned me away. I ended up ordering a 6d refurb for $1330 after tax. I figured at that price I could try it out plus it has a 1 year Canon warranty. If I was going to shoot a lot of video, I think the A7 would be great.

Harry... it amazes me how freely you jump between brands.

With a collection of A-mount glass, I never seriously considered the A7. But I came to a similar conclusion as you. Once you consider the unavailability of lenses, combined with the high price of the few lenses that are available, the A7 doesn't look so attractive. In the end, the 6d becomes much cheaper.... a slightly cheaper body, with many many more affordable native lens options.

On other msg boards, I've seen people stretching their budget for the A7/7r... then only to look for the cheapest possible lens that can be adapted to it. Or using the Sony LA-E4 adapter.... an expensive adapter, that increased the size of the camera, and reduces the light going to the sensor... It's like buying a Mercedes body and then sticking in a Chevy engine. What's the point?

 

[wiigirl]

I personally think the step you should take is pick up a faster, wider, lens first.

Sigma just announced a 18 - 35 mm f1.8 which will be a pretty nice lens for not bad money.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/967344-REG/sigma_18_35mm_f1_8_dc_hsm.html

then put that on your T4i and go out and shoot video of a lit building at night, and see how the noise looks... if it's still unacceptable then look into moving up to the 6D.

 

[HPS3]

I'm not brand loyal because I have no investment in glass. Everything I buy is used so I lose pretty much nothing. I just had the FF itch and money aside and couldn't pass up the 6d refurb deal for $1215.

 

[photo_chick]

Let me first say that the T4i is a great camera. It's extremely capable and has outstanding ISO performance for a crop body. If you ETTR and process well you can get outstanding results at 6400. And it's great for video. Something to keep in mind here as well, since you mentioned video, is that the full frame Canon DSLR's do not have continuous auto focus when shooting video. You might miss that.

Now... I have and love the 6D. While the ISO is amazing, it's not noiseless. I'd put it about 2 stops better than the T4i. I routinely shoot at 12800 and don't hesitate to use 25600. But like I said, its not noiseless and you do have to shoot for the noise and process it well just as you would on any digital camera.

The center point auto focus is phenomenal in low light. The outer points are more than acceptable for my shooting style. It's weak point is tracking the subject but it does about as well as my 50D did. So the AF is good, but of course not 5DmkIII good.

Video is solid. It gets the job done but it clearly was not designed for video. It's better than the 5DmkII's video and they used those to film an episode of House, so it can't be that bad.

When thinking of getting that wider field of view at a given focal length remember the trade off on the long end. You also get more distortion on the wide end than you do on a crop with some lenses. And you'll find when you first go full frame that you have to adjust how you shoot with most of your lenses because those soft corners and vignetting that were non existent with your crop body start to become issues.

It's a tough decision. I swore I'd never go full frame but the ISO performance sucked me in. When it comes down to it that was my bottom line. I shoot a lot of hand held low light stuff. I love mine and don't plan on replacing it anytime soon. I am looking to add a new crop body to my bag though because I still like the crop format for many reasons.

 

[Skywise]

Thanks all!

I picked up a refurb from Canon last night for $1350 and I'll let ya know what I think.

 

[bob100]

Thanks all!

I picked up a refurb from Canon last night for $1350 and I'll let ya know what I think.

definitely an upgrade from the T4i