Full Frame for Dark Rides

[Animagic!]

Howdy everyone!

I'm currently looking into buying a full frame camera. I'm essentially starting from scratch so brand really isn't an issue. I currently shoot with Sony a58, Sony NEX 5, Sony a3000, and a Pentax k30. However I'd like to make the jump up to a Full Frame, primarily for gathering more light.

Ultimately what it comes down to is that I want a great Disney dark ride camera. I want to suck in as much light as possible. I'm trying to keep my ISO and noise as low as possible. Crop sensors can do this to a certain extent with fast primes but I know a full frame would be better suited to the task. Right now I'm considering my options. I'm looking into these...

-A7 or A7r
-Nikon D610
-Canon EOS 6D

Obviously the A7 and A7r are tempting choices. I'm very used to Sony cameras and how they handle. I like the concept of a 36mp sensor and its resolution potential. But I don't know if the theoretical additional ISO performance of the a7r is worth the extra asking price. Autofocus is also reportedly slow in low light for both cameras. But they seem to offer a lot for the money.

The other option I like is the Canon EOS 6D. The optical viewfinder should make shooting low light fairly simple, not to mention an AF system that works down to -3 EV. I can't find any direct comparisons between the a7 and the 6d for ISO noise but the 6d is supposed to handle noise well. And while the Nikon d610 outspecs the 6d in practical shooting it looks like the Canon deals with noise better than the Nikon does at high ISO.

The Nikon d610 is the in the mix because on paper it seems like a good choice. I've seen quite a few complaints about quality control issues. And their history with the d600 makes me nervous.

The Nikon and Canon have a lot more lenses to offer than the Sonys. Which is definitely appealing. Although to be fair an a7 with a Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 wouldn't leave me wanting. But a Nikon or Canon with the new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art would be an amazing combo. Honestly an A7 or A7r with the Sigma would be my first choice (sans adapter of course). But that isn't an option.

What do you guys think? Anybody have any experience with the cameras listed? Thanks for your help?

 

[DoDaLeCa]

Try DPReview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a7/18

I used a 5D3 at DL with a 24 F/1.4L for dark rides and was happy with the pictures I got (some up to ISO 12800).

The 6D is supposed to focus in even lower light (but otherwise not as fast or as many cross points) but I didn't have an issue (notice I was shooting on some rides at f/1.4). Also I thought some tests say the 6D is slightly less noisy than the 5D3 as well.

 

[photo_chick]

The 6D is a phenomenal performer in low light. Not just for low noise (useable ISO 25600 and slightly cleaner all around than the 5DmkIII) but the center point auto focus is great in low light as well. The bad side, the AF doesn't track as well as other cameras and the outer points can be finicky. It doesn't suffer from AF issues as bad as the 5DmkII did, but except for in low light it's not as slick in the AF department as the 5DmkIII.

This is ISO 12800.

Larger Image

 

[Animagic!]

Try DPReview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a7/18

I used a 5D3 at DL with a 24 F/1.4L for dark rides and was happy with the pictures I got (some up to ISO 12800).

The 6D is supposed to focus in even lower light (but otherwise not as fast or as many cross points) but I didn't have an issue (notice I was shooting on some rides at f/1.4). Also I thought some tests say the 6D is slightly less noisy than the 5D3 as well.

Thanks for the link! The Sony's clearly have better resolution but the 6D noise is nice and low. How did you like shooting dark rides at such a wide angle?

The 6D is a phenomenal performer in low light. Not just for low noise (useable ISO 25600 and slightly cleaner all around than the 5DmkIII) but the center point auto focus is great in low light as well. The bad side, the AF doesn't track as well as other cameras and the outer points can be finicky. It doesn't suffer from AF issues as bad as the 5DmkII did, but except for in low light it's not as slick in the AF department as the 5DmkIII.

Thanks for the info! Honestly I'm not too worried about the outer points. I keep my settings at center point autofocus 99.9% of the time. I prefer to meter and focus from the center and recompose after focus if necessary. My main concern is low light focusing and not necessarily sports. I always carry two camera bodies with me so if I want good tracking I can use my a58. It's not an exceptional camera but it can track pretty darn well despite it's modest AF system. Since you're a Canon user can you recommend any great lenses for the 6D? How is the 50mm f/1.8 or the 50mm f/1.4? Or nice zooms? Thanks!

 

[havoc315]

You mentioned wanting to keep your ISO low. Remember, a full frame camera does not change the exposure triangle. If you need 2.8 - 1/60 - ISO 1600 on APS-C, then you will need the same settings on full frame. (Though some cameras do meter differently. Some will slow down the shutter speed more, some will boost the ISO).

For pure low light performance at a value price, it's hard to beat the Canon 6d. Though I might plan to use manual focus as a back up.

I've heard nothing but good things about the d610. Between the d610 and 6d, instead of looking at the tiniest ISO differences, it's more just which camera you're comfortable with.

The A7 series is not really cut out for dark rides at Disney in my opinion. If you're going to have a long day of shooting, you would need several extra batteries.
The 55/1.8 is a great lens supposedly, but you can get a 1.4 or 1.2 for Nikon or Canon.
The A7 and A7r have an especially loud shutter that can be disruptive as well.
And you almost certainly would need to resort to manual focus.

The Sony a99 produced some very nice Dark ride pics for Hockeyman including the best Peter Pan shot I've ever seen. It is slightly behind the 6d and D610 in terms of pure low light performance, but has a few other features handy for low light. (Stabilization isn't as important when moving, but still provides a little benefit. The EVF helps to nail exposure in challenging light. Focus peaking and DMF mode are helpful in nailing focus). Get more dynamic range than the Canon for better shadow detail.

But for purely dark ride shooting, also looking at price, it's easy to put the Canon 6d at the top of the list. Though the Nikon d610 and Sony a99 would likely be able to produce all the same shots. (The A7 and A7r couldn't quite match as you'd be stuck with a slower lens).

 

[photo_chick]

Thanks for the info! Honestly I'm not too worried about the outer points. I keep my settings at center point autofocus 99.9% of the time. I prefer to meter and focus from the center and recompose after focus if necessary. My main concern is low light focusing and not necessarily sports. I always carry two camera bodies with me so if I want good tracking I can use my a58. It's not an exceptional camera but it can track pretty darn well despite it's modest AF system. Since you're a Canon user can you recommend any great lenses for the 6D? How is the 50mm f/1.8 or the 50mm f/1.4? Or nice zooms? Thanks!

The 24-105 f/4 (the 6D's kit lens) is probably the best value as far as L series zooms go when you buy it used or as part of a kit. It's my walk around and I love it. While it's widely regarded as the softest of the L series zooms it's still wicked sharp compared to most third party zooms and all mid grade or lower end Canon EF zooms. As far as primes... my favorite prime is the Samyang 85mm. The Canon 50mm f/1.8 and 1.4 are both solid lenses. I have both and prefer the f/1.4 for most situations. The f/1.8 still comes in handy on a crop body for a super light travel camera but that's all I use it for anymore. My go to tele zoom is the 70-200 f/4 because the f/2.8 is just too heavy for me.

 

[Animagic!]

You mentioned wanting to keep your ISO low. Remember, a full frame camera does not change the exposure triangle. If you need 2.8 - 1/60 - ISO 1600 on APS-C, then you will need the same settings on full frame. (Though some cameras do meter differently. Some will slow down the shutter speed more, some will boost the ISO).

For pure low light performance at a value price, it's hard to beat the Canon 6d. Though I might plan to use manual focus as a back up.

I've heard nothing but good things about the d610. Between the d610 and 6d, instead of looking at the tiniest ISO differences, it's more just which camera you're comfortable with.

The A7 series is not really cut out for dark rides at Disney in my opinion. If you're going to have a long day of shooting, you would need several extra batteries.
The 55/1.8 is a great lens supposedly, but you can get a 1.4 or 1.2 for Nikon or Canon.
The A7 and A7r have an especially loud shutter that can be disruptive as well.
And you almost certainly would need to resort to manual focus.

The Sony a99 produced some very nice Dark ride pics for Hockeyman including the best Peter Pan shot I've ever seen. It is slightly behind the 6d and D610 in terms of pure low light performance, but has a few other features handy for low light. (Stabilization isn't as important when moving, but still provides a little benefit. The EVF helps to nail exposure in challenging light. Focus peaking and DMF mode are helpful in nailing focus). Get more dynamic range than the Canon for better shadow detail.

But for purely dark ride shooting, also looking at price, it's easy to put the Canon 6d at the top of the list. Though the Nikon d610 and Sony a99 would likely be able to produce all the same shots. (The A7 and A7r couldn't quite match as you'd be stuck with a slower lens).

Thanks for the response! You're always full of useful information.

I hear what you're saying about the exposure triangle. But full frames seem to get much better results than APS-C thanks to the large sensor and that's what I'm really after.

I haven't had much experience using manual focus on an OVF but some people love it. I have had good success using focus peaking on Sony EVF. With dark rides I always consider MF to be a back up no matter what camera and lens I'm using. That's just life.

I've been on the fence about the A7 series. I really wanted the A7 to be a good light camera. But the more I researched it the less it seemed to be that way. I just decided if I bought it then I would have to resort to strictly using Focus Peaking and no AF on dark rides. I have seen excellent dark ride and night time photos from an A7 user, especially on Snow White's Scary Adventure and bulb fireworks shots. However, all things considered it's just not the dark ride camera I wanted. But I do find them pretty amazing never the less.

For some reason the a99 doesn't appeal to me. Granted the idea of a FF A mount with stabilization is appealing. But the a58 has turned me off to SLT's a little bit. If Sony makes an a99II then I'll definitely take a look. A mirrorless, stabilized A Mount would be perfect! Maybe an a99 without a mirror.

Unfortunately I can't find a store nearby that has display models of the Nikon d610 or the Canon 6D. I've played with a Canon 60D and that was nice. Very straight forward design, chunky (in a pleasant way) to hold. Simple. I don't know how similar a d5200 is to a d610 but I've used my friend's d5200 and never really had to think about it. It's pretty intuitively set up. Right now I'm leaning more towards the Canon 6D but I have no idea why. LOL

The 24-105 f/4 (the 6D's kit lens) is probably the best value as far as L series zooms go when you buy it used or as part of a kit. It's my walk around and I love it. While it's widely regarded as the softest of the L series zooms it's still wicked sharp compared to most third party zooms and all mid grade or lower end Canon EF zooms. As far as primes... my favorite prime is the Samyang 85mm. The Canon 50mm f/1.8 and 1.4 are both solid lenses. I have both and prefer the f/1.4 for most situations. The f/1.8 still comes in handy on a crop body for a super light travel camera but that's all I use it for anymore. My go to tele zoom is the 70-200 f/4 because the f/2.8 is just too heavy for me.

Thanks for the info! I didn't realize the kit was that nice. I have the Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 (same lens) for Sony A Mount and I love it. Beautiful glass! I've heard the new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art is pretty incredible.

 

[HPS3]

I've shot with them all and would recommend the 6D for price. The center point is awesome and will focus in the dark. The 6D is also better at high ISO with better color and DR at high ISO. The A7 will be manual focus just like your Nex on dark rides.

I mentioned it in another thread, the A7 has sensor reflection issues that make lights at night look terrible.

Sensor reflections are talked about here http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52986111

 

[havoc315]

I actually know a user who took the mirror out of the a99 and uses it as a mirrorless camera. Gets amazing high ISO performance. But it's become a manual focus only camera.
SLTs certainly aren't for everyone, but I'd never judge them by the a58, which I consider to be the worst SLT Sony ever produced -- a downgrade from older models.

Mirrorless full frame -might- be the future. I just don't think the a7 series is there yet. Still too rough around the edges.

In terms of specs, the 6d and d610 are very very close. Center point AF may be better on the Canon, but more flexibility for tracking on the Nikon. Get an extra card slot on the Nikon which is nice, but not a deal maker or breaker.
Don't think you'd be unhappy with either of those choices.

 

[Animagic!]

I've shot with them all and would recommend the 6D for price. The center point is awesome and will focus in the dark. The 6D is also better at high ISO with better color and DR at high ISO. The A7 will be manual focus just like your Nex on dark rides.

I mentioned it in another thread, the A7 has sensor reflection issues that make lights at night look terrible.

Sensor reflections are talked about here http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52986111

Awesome! Thanks for the info! Sounds like the 6D is the way to go.

I saw a different thread where someone took an A7 to Disneyland and they also had issues with reflections. They were very noticeable at night with long exposure shots.

 

[Hockeyman]

You mentioned wanting to keep your ISO low. Remember, a full frame camera does not change the exposure triangle. If you need 2.8 - 1/60 - ISO 1600 on APS-C, then you will need the same settings on full frame. (Though some cameras do meter differently. Some will slow down the shutter speed more, some will boost the ISO).

For pure low light performance at a value price, it's hard to beat the Canon 6d. Though I might plan to use manual focus as a back up.

I've heard nothing but good things about the d610. Between the d610 and 6d, instead of looking at the tiniest ISO differences, it's more just which camera you're comfortable with.

The A7 series is not really cut out for dark rides at Disney in my opinion. If you're going to have a long day of shooting, you would need several extra batteries.
The 55/1.8 is a great lens supposedly, but you can get a 1.4 or 1.2 for Nikon or Canon.
The A7 and A7r have an especially loud shutter that can be disruptive as well.
And you almost certainly would need to resort to manual focus.

The Sony a99 produced some very nice Dark ride pics for Hockeyman including the best Peter Pan shot I've ever seen. It is slightly behind the 6d and D610 in terms of pure low light performance, but has a few other features handy for low light. (Stabilization isn't as important when moving, but still provides a little benefit. The EVF helps to nail exposure in challenging light. Focus peaking and DMF mode are helpful in nailing focus). Get more dynamic range than the Canon for better shadow detail.

But for purely dark ride shooting, also looking at price, it's easy to put the Canon 6d at the top of the list. Though the Nikon d610 and Sony a99 would likely be able to produce all the same shots. (The A7 and A7r couldn't quite match as you'd be stuck with a slower lens).

This the photo in question?

Shot this using a Sony A99 with a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 in manual focus and also why using focus peaking, which I love and helped me out a lot while shooting on dark rides. I jumped from a Sony A55 to the A99 earlier this year and amazed at the jump in ISO between the two. Before I would be a little hesitant shooting in ISO 3200 but now I can shoot in that with no problem and as you cann see even ISO 8000 looks really good. But I will say that I have seen shots with Canons using higher ISO that than and they have come out wonderful and makes me see some of the short comings with my camera still.

Peter Pan (Explored 3-5-14) by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr

 

[TigersLions]

I have a full frame (Nikon D700) and I jacked up the ISO to 6400 for the fireworks and ran noise reduction in Lightroom. I used my 28-70 2.8 zoom lens for the whole trip. You can look at my signature - 2nd trip (Wilderness Cabins) Blurb book for examples...

 

[havoc315]

This the photo in question?

Shot this using a Sony A99 with a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 in manual focus and also why using focus peaking, which I love and helped me out a lot while shooting on dark rides. I jumped from a Sony A55 to the A99 earlier this year and amazed at the jump in ISO between the two. Before I would be a little hesitant shooting in ISO 3200 but now I can shoot in that with no problem and as you cann see even ISO 8000 looks really good. But I will say that I have seen shots with Canons using higher ISO that than and they have come out wonderful and makes me see some of the short comings with my camera still.

Peter Pan (Explored 3-5-14) by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr

Personally, I find the a99 a nice balance of performance, features and low light performance. It's low light performance is still a nicely above any aps-c. And none of the "budget" full frames match the a99 features.

But that's why I felt the original price of the a99 was overpriced. Can't charge $1000 more than a budget full frame and offer lesser low light performance.

And yes, the a99 is admittedly not the king of low light. But as demonstrated by your shot, it has enough ISO performance even for extremely challenging shots.
Though as I stated, if low light performance was my #1 concern, I'd go with the Canon 6d. (But I'd miss the EVF, stabilization and a few other things).

 

[Hockeyman]

Personally, I find the a99 a nice balance of performance, features and low light performance. It's low light performance is still a nicely above any aps-c. And none of the "budget" full frames match the a99 features.

But that's why I felt the original price of the a99 was overpriced. Can't charge $1000 more than a budget full frame and offer lesser low light performance.

And yes, the a99 is admittedly not the king of low light. But as demonstrated by your shot, it has enough ISO performance even for extremely challenging shots.
Though as I stated, if low light performance was my #1 concern, I'd go with the Canon 6d. (But I'd miss the EVF, stabilization and a few other things).

I would have never bought the A99 for $2,700 and fell it was well worth it for the $1,700 I paid for it. I am very happy with, even if it doesn't stack up to some of the other Full Frames.

 

[havoc315]

I would have never bought the A99 for $2,700 and fell it was well worth it for the $1,700 I paid for it. I am very happy with, even if it doesn't stack up to some of the other Full Frames.

I agree, that's a fair price. I paid something similar. The retail prices have come down a bit now, you can even sometimes find it new for around $1900 now. And used models are turning up around $1500-$1600 now. A very fair price.

Careful with your "grass is always greener" there.
When all else is equal -- The Canon 6d and Nikon D610 will give *slightly* better high ISO performance. And there are times when it would be noticeable and useable. But not all else is generally equal.
There are times when it's worth giving up that slight boost in high ISO performance in exchange for IBIS, and then get better results.

Yes, when you're moving on a dark ride, IBIS isn't going to be a huge benefit, and you may get a better shot with the Canon or Nikon.

But if you're stationary -- Taking a shot with your 50mm at 1.4 aperture..
Which is going to give you a better shot.. Canon/Nikon unstabilized at ISO 12800 and 1/60 shutter speed..... Or stabilized Sony A99 at 1/15 shutter speed and ISO of 3200? I'll take the Sony A99 at 3200 over the Canon/Nikon at 12800.

And getting back to the dark ride... how many shots are lost on a traditional dSLR just trying to just the exposure? A very nice benefit of the A99/SLT technology, really getting your exposure levels right nearly 100% of the time, so fewer wasted over/under exposed shots.

Not being a fanboy here.... Check out the Sony user boards, and you get a bunch of bitter "nobody needs higher ISO."
Certainly, there are times it would be preferable to have higher ISO performance. But if you were shooting with the Canon or Nikon, there would also be situations where your A99 would have better captured the images.

Each brand has slightly different strengths. But the reality is, 99% of the time, the different brands across the same sensor size, can capture the same quality images. And there is no one king for the remaining 1%. (Times when IBIS is more helpful than high ISO... times when high ISO is indeed critical... times when the best AF system may win out... times when the best metering/focus peaking/etc/etc may be the difference maker).

 

[photo_chick]

I think if you're a gear oriented shooter, as many of us are, there is always a little bit of gear envy and wishing your camera had this feature or that feature, no matter what camera you have. I wish my 6D had a 100% view finder.

I do disagree with Havoc's statement about the SLT's causing you to miss fewer shots because of exposure. I've seen EVF's that are a little bit wonky and have issues, showing images brighter or darker than they should be or with colors off. I still believe that with any body your best bet on nailing exposure is learning to read the histogram and learning how your gear behaves in a given situation.

As far as IS... that only gets you so far and doesn't cover all types of shooting. Add to that the multitude of IS lenses out now (including primes) and IBIS is starting to loose it's advantage.

 

[havoc315]

I think if you're a gear oriented shooter, as many of us are, there is always a little bit of gear envy and wishing your camera had this feature or that feature, no matter what camera you have. I wish my 6D had a 100% view finder.

I do disagree with Havoc's statement about the SLT's causing you to miss fewer shots because of exposure. I've seen EVF's that are a little bit wonky and have issues, showing images brighter or darker than they should be or with colors off. I still believe that with any body your best bet on nailing exposure is learning to read the histogram and learning how your gear behaves in a given situation.

As far as IS... that only gets you so far and doesn't cover all types of shooting. Add to that the multitude of IS lenses out now (including primes) and IBIS is starting to loose it's advantage.

So let me revise my statement to a "properly calibrated" EVF. Or as you said --- learning your EVF. When shooting full manual, it is a big plus with "what you see is what you get."
When shooting OVF, there were countless times that I simply didn't realize a setting wasn't right until I checked the image after the shot. It can happen with an EVF as well, but far less often for me. Not just nailing the exposure, but also helps in nailing the white balance.

I agree that IBIS is losing it's advantage. 5 years ago, it was a much bigger deal. But it's advantage isn't gone. Canon has just started introducing stabilization to primes, most of their primes are still unstabilized.

Then of course, there is the added benefit of getting extra value out of old cheap lenses. (How many stabilized Canon lenses can you find for under $100?) And IBIS is quieter than OSS.

So the advantage is certainly not what it was a few years ago, but it's not gone.

 

[havoc315]

I think if you're a gear oriented shooter, as many of us are, there is always a little bit of gear envy and wishing your camera had this feature or that feature, no matter what camera you have. I wish my 6D had a 100% view finder.
.

I've got the 100% VF, though it's EVF. I do wish I had the high ISO capability of the 6d. Wish I had the new lens selection of Canon and Nikon, particularly constant F4 lenses. Wish I had the AF array of the Nikon D800 (or D4). I don't miss OVF, except for battery performance.

So yes... give me my A99, with the Canon 6d low light performance, Canon selection of lenses, Nikon D800/D4 autofocus, and a battery than can do over 1,000 shots.

 

[Animagic!]

Peter Pan (Explored 3-5-14) by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr

This picture is awesome! I struggle with Peter Pan. I think everyone does. The best I ever got was this pic on my a58 with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on manual focus.

I do not think the a99 is a slacker by any means. I think IBIS is a wonderful feature and I'll definitely miss it if I get the Canon 6D. Yes, many lenses come with IS but it's nice to know that any lens you use will get stabilized, including adapted ones.

Right now I'm focusing more on the Sigma Art line. I think slapping the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art on any full frame with yield quite pleasant results. The Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art looks handy dandy as well. I'm not sure if the 35mm f/1.4 is something I'd buy though.

 

[havoc315]

This picture is awesome! I struggle with Peter Pan. I think everyone does. The best I ever got was this pic on my a58 with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on manual focus.

I do not think the a99 is a slacker by any means. I think IBIS is a wonderful feature and I'll definitely miss it if I get the Canon 6D. Yes, many lenses come with IS but it's nice to know that any lens you use will get stabilized, including adapted ones.

Right now I'm focusing more on the Sigma Art line. I think slapping the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art on any full frame with yield quite pleasant results. The Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art looks handy dandy as well. I'm not sure if the 35mm f/1.4 is something I'd buy though.

Agreed, I'm going to eventually consider the 24-105. But only if I sell a couple of my current lenses.

And that's a great picture of Captain Hook, especially for APS-C. But it's a great picture, regardless of the sensor size.