Going full frame

Han_Photo

Han_Photo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
24
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

So I'm looking to upgrade my Canon 7dmkii to something full frame. I have always had a canon DSLR (1200d before this one) and have been using a dslr for the past 8 years.

I am still open minded to other brands at the moment, however I have a few expensive lenses with canon (100-400mm, 16-35mm f/2.8, and a couple of cheaper ones) that I would have to swap as well. Tbh I am going to switch out to a 24-70 and 70-200 anyway.


I know the canon range isn't mind blowing compared to other brands at the moment, but I know my way around my canon pretty well, so I guess that counts for something?

Who has "jumped ship" and was it a pain?

What full frame camera would you recommend as a first please? budget around 2k. I can push higher if it's worth it :)

I am hoping to do some paid family portrait shoots in the future so wanting to invest now.

Thanks for reading,
Hannah.
 
What sort of photography do you do, or want to do, as that would help people suggest something specific? If it's fast moving wildlife then I'd stick with your 7D II, as the crop factor and AF speed are ideal for that. If it's mainly slower stuff and massive MP resolution isn't a priority, then a mint-ish used 6D can be had for around the £500 mark. This gives very nice looking full frame images and will take any Canon EF fit lenses you have (not EF-S ones though!).

So for around £500 or so (once prices stabilise after Coronavirus lockdown shortages) you can see how you take to full frame (you'll notice a big difference in depth of field, particularly at the 400mm end of your zoom wide open, where you'll only have a few inches in focus each way). You can also see how the mirrorless v DSLR thing pans out and save up for a major upgrade once things settle down there.

No doubt you'll have loads of mirrorless fans telling you to jump that way, but I doubt you could switch to a brilliant FF mirrorless outfit for £2k at the moment, and using adaptors on your existing lenses is always going to be a compromise and a temptation to spend even more money in uncertain times.
 
Last edited:
Box Brownie said:
My initial thought would be what about the Canon 5Dmk4 ?
Click to expand...
That would be the way I'd jump at the moment if I upgraded my 6D Mk1, but it's a major outlay for probably a 15% ish improvement in image quality. The 5D Mk3 has virtually indistinguishable image quality to the 6D, but more AF points and quicker off-centre AF, so not that tempting for the money unless you need the AF for fast moving stuff. Hence me hanging on!
 
Last edited:
I'm looking at doing outdoor family portraits, maybe some (home) studio portraits in the future...when things are allowed to open up again and see where it goes.

I have shot wildlife for sometime now and I am ready for a change. Also having a baby has changed my focus in life, and I love capturing little faces now :).

I was toying with the idea of a 5d mk iv, but it doesn't seem to live up to other brands of cameras in that price range.

I know the Canon EOS R is a popular mirrorless choice, but I cant be bothered with the hassle of adaptors etc.
 
Han_Photo said:
I'm looking at doing outdoor family portraits, maybe some (home) studio portraits in the future...when things are allowed to open up again and see where it goes.

I have shot wildlife for sometime now and I am ready for a change. Also having a baby has changed my focus in life, and I love capturing little faces now :).

I was toying with the idea of a 5d mk iv, but it doesn't seem to live up to other brands of cameras in that price range.

I know the Canon EOS R is a popular mirrorless choice, but I cant be bothered with the hassle of adaptors etc.
Click to expand...

Well, Martin Parr uses a 5D iv and seems to like it. I think people can get too wrapped up in lab tests and dynamic range figures, it's how the photos look that matters, and how easy the camera is to use to get the shots. If you're used to a Canon DSLR the transition to another should be easier than jumping brands.

However, before you spend £2k on a camera body, have a look at images from a 6D Mk1 and see if that might do the job (the 6D ii wasn't a massive improvement in image quality terms, and a Mk1 6D would be well up to the job of outdoor and indoor portrait work, it's also reasonably compact and light too for a FF DSLR) You could then keep your 7Dii, as the crop factor and increased depth of field is handy when taking tele-lens photos of wildlife (I keep toying with getting a 7D ii for that reason!). You'd then have of both worlds (if a 6D is enough for you IQ wise), plus around £1500 still in the bank, perhaps ready for a major upgrade once the market and mirrorless/DSLR thing settles down.. or as an emergency fund if the Coronavirus thing kicks off again! If not, then I don't think you'd be disappointed in the image quality from a 5D iv, but you can check this out by looking for some full resolution images on line.
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
Well, Martin Parr uses a 5D iv and seems to like it. I think people can get too wrapped up in lab tests and dynamic range figures, it's how the photos look that matters, and how easy the camera is to use to get the shots. If you're used to a Canon DSLR the transition to another should be easier than jumping brands.

However, before you spend £2k on a camera body, have a look at images from a 6D Mk1 and see if that might do the job (the 6D ii wasn't a massive improvement in image quality terms, and a Mk1 6D would be well up to the job of outdoor and indoor portrait work, it's also reasonably compact and light too) You could then keep your 7Dii, as the crop factor and increased depth of field is handy when taking tele-lens photos of wildlife (I keep toying with getting a 7D ii for that reason!). You'd then have of both worlds (if a 6D is enough IQ wise), plus around £1500 still in the bank, perhaps ready for a major upgrade once the market and mirrorless/DSLR thing settles down.. or as an emergency fund if the Coronavirus thing kicks off again! If not, then I don't think you'd be disappointed in the image quality from a 5D iv, but you can check this out by looking for some full resolution images on line.
Click to expand...


That's a really good idea! I think i'll check out IQ of the 6d. (which is something I hadn't considered before. I just want something that I can take photos with and be really confident delivering to a client. AND I would get to keep my 7D ii :)
 
So for portraits, then it's more about the lenses, than the camera. Having said that; a full frame camera will allow you to take advantage of the shallower depth of field for a given equivalent focal length. IE; a 50mm lens on crop, gives an equivalent angle of view as say an 85mm lens on full frame, but without the shallow DoF that the full frame lens will offer, which of course is quite desirable with portraiture. Quite badly explained really. But a 50mm f1.4 will only give similar DoF to an 85mm f2.3 or so, so if you want that 85mm f1.4 'look', then you have to move to full frame. Hope that makes sense.


Han_Photo said:
I was toying with the idea of a 5d mk iv, but it doesn't seem to live up to other brands of cameras in that price range.
Click to expand...

It'll be a great cam. Ignore all the negative crap you can read online. I'm a Nikon user, but the 5D mk4 is a fantastic cam. No question. At any price point, the truth is that there really isn't all that much difference between brands, and the image quality will be more or less equal. One might do certain colours differently, one might have better low light performance, one might have better AF. These differences won't ever be massive though, in terms of real world use. A 5D mk4 would be perfect for your needs. And you'd keep your existing, excellent lenses.
 
Han_Photo said:
That's a really good idea! I think i'll check out IQ of the 6d. (which is something I hadn't considered before. I just want something that I can take photos with and be really confident delivering to a client. AND I would get to keep my 7D ii :)
Click to expand...
Here's a 'real world' shot taken with mine in weak September UK afternoon sunshine, sorry it's not a portrait, but it's a JPEG straight from the camera. You can click on the image to view large in Flickr, it's had nothing done to it other than what Flickr might have done after I uploaded it. :)



Yes, the 5Div will give probably another 'zoom in click' or two of resolution but is that really worth over £1500 more with the economy as it is at the moment? I'm afraid only you can decide that... but I'm keeping my 6D for the time being! ;) If buying used, then I'd go somewhere reputable that offers a good, solid guarantee (perhaps MPB, WEX or FFordes?), then at least you've got a chance if something does go wrong. Hope this is useful.
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
Here's a 'real world' shot taken with mine in weak September UK afternoon sunshine, sorry it's not a portrait, but it's a JPEG straight from the camera. You can click on the image to view large in Flickr, it's had nothing done to it other than what Flickr might have done after I uploaded it. :)



Yes, the 5Div will give probably another 'zoom in click' or two of resolution but is that really worth over £1500 more with the economy as it is at the moment? I'm afraid only you can decide that... but I'm keeping my 6D for the time being! ;) If buying used, then I'd go somewhere reputable that offers a good, solid guarantee (perhaps MPB, WEX or FFordes?), then at least you've got a chance if something does go wrong. Hope this is useful.
Click to expand...


That's a nice quality image. And probably plenty for what I need for now. :)
 
Han_Photo said:
That's a nice quality image. And probably plenty for what I need for now. :)
Click to expand...
Well, happy hunting if you decide to buy one, there are plenty around so probably worth waiting for a mint-ish one without scuffs and scratches (with a low shutter count), as it shouldn't take long for one to come along. At around the £500 mark I think it's got to be the best bang for buck in FF DSLRs at the moment. :) The original reviews moaned a bit about lack of AF points and bells and whistles, but it has a habit of delivering lovely looking shots, and to me that's what matters. It's got good low-light performance too (certainly for it's time), which is handy for grab-shots indoors.
 
Last edited:
It's a loooong time since I moved from APS-C to FF.

Actually I grew up with "FF" in the days of film but I moved to APS-C DSLR's pretty easily and APS-C it had to be as there weren't any FF DSLR's at that time. I want from an Nikon SLR to a Canon 300D and then to a 20D with a 10D in there too. When I moved from my APS-C 20D which I'd used for over 7 years to a FF 5D I actually had to adjust as I'd got used to the focal lengths and depth of field with APS-C and that can have implications for aperture, shutter speed and ISO.

These days I do believe that mirrorless has advantages and that's the way I went after the 5D and the way I'd recommend. For portraits I can see a clear advantage for mirrorless as you can focus anywhere in the frame with very good accuracy and consistency and you can do so using eye or face detect which means you can leave the focus to the camera in the knowledge that it'll hit focus while you get on with the composition and capturing the moment. The WYSIWYG of mirrorless could be an advantage too. You may be able to do these things with a DSLR in live view but maybe in a less good way.

Anyway, I'd bite the bullet and go mirrorless.
 
AZ6 said:
So for portraits, then it's more about the lenses, than the camera. Having said that; a full frame camera will allow you to take advantage of the shallower depth of field for a given equivalent focal length. IE; a 50mm lens on crop, gives an equivalent angle of view as say an 85mm lens on full frame, but without the shallow DoF that the full frame lens will offer, which of course is quite desirable with portraiture. Quite badly explained really. But a 50mm f1.4 will only give similar DoF to an 85mm f2.3 or so, so if you want that 85mm f1.4 'look', then you have to move to full frame. Hope that makes sense.




It'll be a great cam. Ignore all the negative crap you can read online. I'm a Nikon user, but the 5D mk4 is a fantastic cam. No question. At any price point, the truth is that there really isn't all that much difference between brands, and the image quality will be more or less equal. One might do certain colours differently, one might have better low light performance, one might have better AF. These differences won't ever be massive though, in terms of real world use. A 5D mk4 would be perfect for your needs. And you'd keep your existing, excellent lenses.
Click to expand...



Yes that does make sense, and makes me even more excited about getting a full frame camera :)
Thanks for the info.
 
woof woof said:
It's a loooong time since I moved from APS-C to FF.

Actually I grew up with "FF" in the days of film but I moved to APS-C DSLR's pretty easily and APS-C it had to be as there weren't any FF DSLR's at that time. I want from an Nikon SLR to a Canon 300D and then to a 20D with a 10D in there too. When I moved from my APS-C 20D which I'd used for over 7 years to a FF 5D I actually had to adjust as I'd got used to the focal lengths and depth of field with APS-C and that can have implications for aperture, shutter speed and ISO.

These days I do believe that mirrorless has advantages and that's the way I went after the 5D and the way I'd recommend. For portraits I can see a clear advantage for mirrorless as you can focus anywhere in the frame with very good accuracy and consistency and you can do so using eye or face detect which means you can leave the focus to the camera in the knowledge that it'll hit focus while you get on with the composition and capturing the moment. The WYSIWYG of mirrorless could be an advantage too. You may be able to do these things with a DSLR in live view but maybe in a less good way.

Anyway, I'd bite the bullet and go mirrorless.
Click to expand...


Ahh so many options :runaway::runaway::runaway:
 
Full frame requires that you make choices more consciously about the point of focus & what is in and out of focus. Personally I love shallow DoF images provided the technique fits the subject - one just has to be aware that when you're holding a hammer etc etc.

If you want to take pictures of people then you should research eye-AF and how it may help. I don't want to talk about particular brands because that's not necessarily ideal, but it's extremely helpful to have an AF system capable of assisting that way so you can concentrate on the subject.
 
I took a picture of Mrs WW today with eye/face detect enabled and it is IMO a wonderful thing. There was no faff on, just frame and press the button safe in the knowledge that the camera has focused where I wanted it to. Having to use focus points clustered around the centre of the frame or even having to focus and recompose would be so limiting after this.

DSLR's can do some things that mirrorless camera do in liveview mode so that is something to think about but IMO mirrorless has many advantages.
 
ancient_mariner said:
res of people then you should research eye-AF and how it may help. I don't want to talk about particular brands because that's not necessarily ideal, but it's extremely helpful to have an AF system capable of assisting that way so you can concentra
Click to expand...
woof woof said:
I'd be careful of the shallow DoF look.

This is something I've posted a few times but I think it says it better than I ever could...

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html

The zero DoF look does IMO sometimes get done to death and I do tire of people pictures with one eye in the depth and nothing else.
Click to expand...

An interesting read. Including the comments section!
 
woof woof said:
I'd be careful of the shallow DoF look.

This is something I've posted a few times but I think it says it better than I ever could...

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html

The zero DoF look does IMO sometimes get done to death and I do tire of people pictures with one eye in the depth and nothing else.
Click to expand...
The single eyelash in focus look can be OTT at times, but I like FF for the separation from the background and foreground, ie whole body in focus but distinctly separate from the rest.
 
Han_Photo said:
Well, now I'm all confused and I'm going to sit on the fence :exit:
Click to expand...
Just because it's FF it doesn't have to be shallow DOF, you have the option and control (y)
 
snerkler said:
The single eyelash in focus look can be OTT at times, but I like FF for the separation from the background and foreground, ie whole body in focus but distinctly separate from the rest.
Click to expand...

Yes but you can do that with smaller formats to, at least to an extent and that extent might be enough.
 
Han_Photo said:
An interesting read. Including the comments section!
Click to expand...

Lots of willy-waving along the lines of my willy is more satisfying than theirs because all of it's in focus. ;)
 
woof woof said:
Yes but you can do that with smaller formats to, at least to an extent and that extent might be enough.
Click to expand...
Yep, but it’s not enough for me :p
 
As much as I love my D750 (yep, the Dark Side! haha) as soon as the opportunity is right I'll be changing back to Sony, probably an A7 Mark III. I can't justify an A9 for hobby use only. The auto eye focus is crazy accurate and fast which is great for capturing the children, it's a great sensor and not too big. The DSLR is just getting a little too bulky for me these days.
 
OK, just to play Devil's advocate here: So you chop in your 7D ii in part exchange (plus a good wedge of additional money) for a full frame mirrorless camera body, including a fair few quid for a lens adaptor, which you'll need to use your existing EF lenses. Oh, and what about a flash? Will your existing Canon Speedlites work on a Sony mirrorless? Most likely not... so there's another couple of hundred £ potentially gone?

That blows your budget, so no significant spare/emergency cash left. Time to earn some more money... damn, you drop your wonderful new camera or it breaks, what then? Insurance claim if you dropped it, or warranty claim if it's new and broken? Great, but that takes time and you've got some clients booked in for portraits, and no second camera! Budget gone, no back-up and a couple of weeks or more without a camera while it's all sorted (fingers crossed that it is that quick!).

On the other hand, £500 or so and you've got two cameras, one full frame and your existing 7D ii. Plus you keep that nice, warm, Canon colour rendition you're used to, so perhaps less time in Photoshop trying to get the image to look like you used to get straight from your old camera?

Yes, auto eye focus on a full frame mirrorless camera might be a wonderful thing, but on a budget of £2k then I don't think I'd make the switch and put all my eggs in one basket if I could spend five to six hundred to go full frame with a second camera body. If I had a budget of £5K then it might be different. Alternatively, I could set about trying to earn that £5k for a complete system change by spending around £500. And if it turns out that I can't earn £5k with my photography (due to the economy and/or lack of demand), then I'd probably be quite grateful I'd only spent £500, and not £5k on a new camera system! :)

Well, that's my take on it. Opinions of others (and their budgets) are bound to vary.
 
Last edited:
The budget wouldn't really be £2k as there would be trade in for the current gear, although there's no mention of the lenses being 1st or 2nd gen - could this make a significant difference?

But yes, the eye af really is a wonderful thing and it doesn't have to mean nano depth of field, just guaranteed sharpness :)



But if this is a business venture then obviously there is a lot more to consider.
 
OK so my two penneth worth. I can't help but feel that some of this is driven by GAS and the want to try FF out as much as it is about the new direction of photography. Nothing wrong with that, I was there several years ago and TBH glad I scratched the itch, I do prefer the look that FF can give in certain scenarios and the low light and DR advantages.

One thing that I've not seen mentioned above (although I've only skimmed) is how difficult it is to capture kids, congratulations on your new arrival btw (y) Babies are easy to capture, but when they turn in to toddlers and older trying to get sharp images when they're running around etc is not easy and this is an area where a good AF system really helps imo. I've never owned one but all reviews tell me the Canon 6D is not really up to the job, and I'm not even sure whether the 6DII would be the best. I'm not sure where you've read the 5DIV isn't very good as that couldn't be further from the truth, it's an amazing camera capable of just about anything.

One thing that I never got was eye AF, I must admit I thought it was a bit of a gimmick as you've always been able to focus on the eyes with cameras without this feature. However, I recently swapped systems (for other reasons than eye AF) and now having that feature I can see why people rave about it. TBH it's still not something I'll use a lot as unfortunately I don't get much chance to take portraits, but on the odd time I've used it boy does it make life much easier. I can imagine trying to capture kids running around and at play would be much more of a breeze and much less of a frustration.
 
Last edited:
This is why I moved back to DLSR from the A6000, the AF was too slow for quick moving subjects. I ended up using manual focus and it's high fps and wait for the subject to move into my focus spot.

The D750 I moved to has an excellent af system, up there with the best even now and I get a pretty good hit rate when the kids are racing around, but looking at how fast the A7 Mark III (and A9) it makes my D750 reach for the zimmer.
 
snerkler said:
One thing that I've not seen mentioned above (although I've only skimmed) is how difficult it is to capture kids, congratulations on your new arrival btw (y) Babies are easy to capture, but when they turn in to toddlers and older trying to get sharp images when they're running around etc is not easy and this is an area where a good AF system really helps imo. I've never owned one but all reviews tell me the Canon 6D is not really up to the job, and I'm not even sure whether the 6DII would be the best. I'm not sure where've you read the 5DIV isn't very good as that couldn't be further from the truth, it's an amazing camera capable of just about anything.
Click to expand...

The centre AF point on the 6D is actually better than the one on the 5Diii as it's of the same cross type but works in even lower light. Whilst it's not the right camera for capturing fast moving action, by the time Hannah's baby is a sprinting toddler, she'll probably have upgraded her kit anyway. The suggestion of a 6D was as a stop-gap and an economical way for her to try FF DSLR. For around £500 she'd have a FF DSLR capable of giving very pleasing results and well suited to indoor and outdoor portrait work (but not fast-moving kids). If she finds she's not keen on it then she might have lost £50 to £150 if she sells it or trades it against something else within around 12 months. However, if she lays out £2k+ on a new(ish) 5D iv (and you can buy grey new cheaper than a minter used!) and doesn't like it then she's probably going to take a much bigger hit.

I don't think £2k (if that includes a trade-in on a 7D ii) is enough of a budget to change to a new high-spec FF mirrorless camera. If the lenses need to be changed too, then I think a total budget of around £5k to get a new(ish) high-spec FF mirrorless camera, a couple of top quality lenses (to replace the existing Canon L spec ones) and one or two good quality flash units (which will most likely be needed for indoor and even outdoor portrait work)… and even then, £5k total budget might be tight. Plus she'd have no back up camera if something went wrong.

So, between £500 and £600 to try the water with a FF DSLR that can deliver very nice looking results, plus keep the existing lenses and 7Dii for fast moving stuff and the crop factor with the 100-400 lens, and have a back-up camera in case it's needed.

Spend the whole £2k+ budget on a 5Div but have no back-up camera or crop factor 'magnification' on the 100-400.

Or potentially really stretch the budget to try to go mirrorless, using an adaptor for existing lenses (always a compromise and an invitation to spend even more money changing the lenses!), have no back-up camera and probably have to make a compromise on a single compatible flash unit too, putting even more strain on the budget?

In the end, only Hannah can decide what's right for her photographic needs, and I wish her the very best of luck in choosing a suitable set-up. (y)
 
Last edited:
Thank you everyone for all the replies! I can see it has sparked a debate and of course everyone is going to have a different opinion (which is great for me as I get to see all sides).

I love the idea of eye auto focus on cameras such as the Canon EOS R, I don't like the idea of an adapter, but I was thinking of swapping my 100-400 for a 70-200 and 16-35 for a 24-70 anyway so perhaps that's an option.

I could give the 6D a try for a few months and probably not lose much on it as Mr Badger says, as and entry to FF. Test it on my 12 month old who is soon to be running about to see if I can get the desired shots and go from there.

However Panamoz are doing a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR Camera with Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens Kit for £2720 so if I sold my current camera and 16-35mm that brings me in under budget :thinking: Hmmmmm.

I'm not going to rush into a decision. I have never done any paid work with my camera before so it's all new (and probably not the best time to start during a global pandemic but hey ho)
 
Mr Badger said:
The centre AF point on the 6D is actually better than the one on the 5Diii as it's of the same cross type but works in even lower light. Whilst it's not the right camera for capturing fast moving action, by the time Hannah's baby is a sprinting toddler, she'll probably have upgraded her kit anyway. The suggestion of a 6D was as a stop-gap and an economical way for her to try FF DSLR. For around £500 she'd have a FF DSLR capable of giving very pleasing results and well suited to indoor and outdoor portrait work (but not fast-moving kids). If she finds she's not keen on it then she might have lost £50 to £150 if she sells it or trades it against something else within around 12 months. However, if she lays out £2k+ on a new(ish) 5D iv (and you can buy grey new cheaper than a minter used!) and doesn't like it then she's probably going to take a much bigger hit.

I don't think £2k (if that includes a trade-in on a 7D ii) is enough of a budget to change to a new high-spec FF mirrorless camera. If the lenses need to be changed too, then I think a total budget of around £5k to get a new(ish) high-spec FF mirrorless camera, a couple of top quality lenses (to replace the existing Canon L spec ones) and one or two good quality flash units (which will most likely be needed for indoor and even outdoor portrait work)… and even then, £5k total budget might be tight. Plus she'd have no back up camera if something went wrong.

So, between £500 and £600 to try the water with a FF DSLR that can deliver very nice looking results, plus keep the existing lenses and 7Dii for fast moving stuff and the crop factor with the 100-400 lens, and have a back-up camera in case it's needed.

Spend the whole £2k+ budget on a 5Div but have no back-up camera or crop factor 'magnification' on the 100-400.

Or potentially really stretch the budget to try to go mirrorless, using an adaptor for existing lenses (always a compromise and an invitation to spend even more money changing the lenses!), have no back-up camera and probably have to make a compromise on a single compatible flash unit too, putting even more strain on the budget?

In the end, only Hannah can decide what's right for her photographic needs, and I wish her the very best of luck in choosing a suitable set-up. (y)
Click to expand...
Yep, can't argue with the financial benefit of going for a 6D. With regards to the single body only if they swap systems or go for the 5DIV and not having the 'crop' factor I'd argue that as the 5DIV has a higher MP count, and FF crops better than APS-C that you'd end up with similarly pleasing results by cropping something like the 5DIV. I've run two bodies for years and have recently just gone the other way, consolidating to one kit and prefer it that way, but I'm lucky that in 'crop' mode I still get 25mp.

Like always it will be down to the individual and often it's a battle between financial 'sense' and what the 'heart' wants ;)
 
So the ...6D. Sooo few focus points compared to the 65 I'm used to :wideyed:
 
Han_Photo said:
So the ...6D. Sooo few focus points compared to the 65 I'm used to :wideyed:
Click to expand...
Yes, but they're spaced out across a similar area (or at least I think they are, but this should be easy for you to check), and it wasn't designed for fast action shots, more for portrait, travel, landscape, etc. I was once used to 45 eye-controlled AF points on my Canon EOS-3 film camera (you just looked at the AF point to select it, giving you a virtually psychic camera - such a handy feature and one I'd love them to bring back) but I've not found my 6D particularly wanting in the AF point department, but I don't do fast action stuff, or I'd have gone for a 7Dii or a used 1Dx. It's horses for courses really.

If fact, for film cameras, I generally use my EOS 30 and 30v rather than my EOS-3. They've only got 7 eye controlled AF points, but they're noticeably smaller and lighter, making them easier to carry and use, and do much the same job for the type of photos I take, so I think AF point numbers can be a bit overrated? Once again, it's personal preference.
 
Last edited:
Let me fix that for you ;)
ancient_mariner said:
So - save money and compromise (and then change again later) or spend more & get what you think you might want?

:naughty:
Click to expand...
I've been there and got the T-shirt when it comes to doing that over the years! When I bought that EOS-3 new, I never thought in 20 years time I'd be using a lesser spec and significantly cheaper EOS 30 more often. Just goes to show you never can tell. :(
 
I wouldn't be overly worried about a backup camera for portrait work, it's not going to be a critical as something like wedding photography. One decent lens and a cheaper backup lens should be ample to get things going at first.

You can always rent should there be an emergency. However, unless you have jobs lined up, I would be a little hesitant with investing anything at all in what may be seen as a luxury service in the middle of a pandemic?
 
gman said:
I wouldn't be overly worried about a backup camera for portrait work, it's not going to be a critical as something like wedding photography. One decent lens and a cheaper backup lens should be ample to get things going at first.

You can always rent should there be an emergency. However, unless you have jobs lined up, I would be a little hesitant with investing anything at all in what may be seen as a luxury service in the middle of a pandemic?
Click to expand...
Currently, I couldn't agree more about your caution over the economy from a business point of view. As little as possible, but as much as absolutely necessary, might appear to be wise advice when thinking about spending money on business kit at the moment?
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
Currently, I couldn't agree more about your caution over the economy from a business point of view. As little as possible, but as much as absolutely necessary, might appear to be wise advice when thinking about spending money on business kit at the moment?
Click to expand...

Aye I agree. At first I could only think about the camera and lenses, but then it suddenly dawned on me how many pros on here must be having a very difficult time just surviving and they've already the kit.

It's also just crossed my mind that we could end up with a similar situation as the financial crisis (2007/2008) where it seemed like there was this sudden influx of photographers (in particular wedding photographers), presumably having unfortunately lost their jobs and grabbing their camera to become an instant pro. It's a huge assumption I'm making, but there did seem to be a lot of £300 wedding photographer about. The market could end up being flooded with a lot of "pros" soon.

Could definitely be prudent to hang on for a bit? You current kit is more than capable of producing stunning images and if memory serves doesn't the 7D2 have a great AF system hence beign so popular with wildlife photographers?

linky
 
Not sure if if this has been said already. I have a 7d2 and it is a very capable camera. I use it for all photography. It’s great at wildlife, action and I have used it for weddings. It’s a great camera. Save some money and stick with it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top