Upgrading to Full Frame

Old Aug 1, 17, 9:07 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: TPA
Programs: IHG Platinum, HHonors Gold, Marriott Gold, National EE
Posts: 1,183
Upgrading to Full Frame

What's up all. So I currently shoot with a Canon 60D (for the last 4 years) and my primary lens is a 15-85. I've been holding off on purchasing any new lenses for a little over a year now since I knew I'd want to go full frame at some point and didn't want to lock myself in to a particular brand.

The question is, do I go for a used 6D and throw the extra money into a new lens (the 24-105 would be a perfect replacement for my 15-85 which won't work anymore) or should I look into one of the Sony A7 series options?

Battery performance is obviously a huge hit going with Sony plus I think I should be able to get a 6D cheaper than the Sony counterpart.

I'm still a few months out from making a decision on this, just looking for input.
ChiefNWA is offline  
Old Aug 1, 17, 10:19 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 429
Whats pulling you to Sony? Once you put FF glass on a mirrorless body you start to lose the size advantage. If you already have invested in Canon glass I would stick with them.
dascc is offline  
Old Aug 1, 17, 3:49 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Programs: BA Gold, HHonors Diamond
Posts: 317
"do I go for a used 6D and throw the extra money into a new lens (the 24-105"

Yes, perfect set up with all the advantages of full frame. Be mindful of the limited focus points on the 6D mk1.
Telecasterman is offline  
Old Aug 1, 17, 9:29 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 161
With the 6D mkii coming, you might be able to find a deal on a new 6D with 24-105 bundle (which is what I bought 4+ years ago)
klew97 is offline  
Old Aug 4, 17, 6:23 am
  #5  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: TPA
Programs: IHG Platinum, HHonors Gold, Marriott Gold, National EE
Posts: 1,183
Originally Posted by dascc View Post
Whats pulling you to Sony? Once you put FF glass on a mirrorless body you start to lose the size advantage. If you already have invested in Canon glass I would stick with them.
The whole draw is simply that it's newer technology and is marginally lighter (even with Canon glass) but it's hard to justify the price increase over a used 6D. On top of that, after 4/5 years I'm pretty accustomed to Canon.

Originally Posted by Telecasterman View Post
"do I go for a used 6D and throw the extra money into a new lens (the 24-105"

Yes, perfect set up with all the advantages of full frame. Be mindful of the limited focus points on the 6D mk1.
Yea, it's something to be mindful, that's for sure. I've also been reading that the image quality is on par with the mk1, so I'm guessing my best bet is to go with the mk1 and invest the remainder into the lens.

Originally Posted by klew97 View Post
With the 6D mkii coming, you might be able to find a deal on a new 6D with 24-105 bundle (which is what I bought 4+ years ago)
Excellent. I've also looked at the 16-35 since I shoot quite a lot of wide angles. Doing that though would not only cost me more but I'd also likely have to carry around a 2nd lens.
ChiefNWA is offline  
Old Aug 5, 17, 5:58 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: SYD
Programs: QF
Posts: 490
It sort of depends on what kind of photography you're doing. Sometimes crop factor is quite helpful glass is a better investment than a body. If you have good EF glass already then maybe the body is a better bet.
CitizenWorld is offline  
Old Aug 7, 17, 11:46 am
  #7  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: TPA
Programs: IHG Platinum, HHonors Gold, Marriott Gold, National EE
Posts: 1,183
Originally Posted by CitizenWorld View Post
It sort of depends on what kind of photography you're doing. Sometimes crop factor is quite helpful glass is a better investment than a body. If you have good EF glass already then maybe the body is a better bet.
I typically only use the camera when traveling (which is nearly every weekend). I shoot a lot of landscape and street photography, so a wide angle is what I think I'd use the most as my current 15-85 is my most used lens.

I found a good deal on the 16-35 f4 IS that I might pull the trigger on. I figure I can probably pick up a 6D body once the 6D mkII hits the shelves.
ChiefNWA is offline  
Old Aug 12, 17, 10:47 am
  #8  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 10,541
6DMkII has dynamic range problems. I'd hold off on it.

The 6D has GPS if it matters. For travel photography, some people like it.

That is one reason I've stayed with Nikon instead of going with Sony, the lack of GPS options, even though external devices.

There are rumors that eventually Canon and Nikon will offer FF mirrorless.
wco81 is offline  
Old Aug 14, 17, 12:10 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Programs: AC SE
Posts: 2,422
I use the 6D with the EF 16-35mm f/4L and couldn't be happier with the results. You're welcome to check out the 500px link in my signature for some examples (mostly landscapes).

That being said, I also have friends who use the Sony and are quite satisfied. And I do envy them not having to deal with the 6D's prolific dustspot issues.
capedreamer is offline  
Old Oct 10, 17, 10:46 am
  #10  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: TPA
Programs: IHG Platinum, HHonors Gold, Marriott Gold, National EE
Posts: 1,183
So I'm back at it with this dilemma again, albeit slightly different.

I've settled on staying with Canon but I'm wobbling back and forth on what to do right now. I shoot mainly travel/landscape/city photography for the record.

Current setup is a 60D with the 15-85mm and a 50mm f/1.8.

Option 1: Complete upgrade to a 6D with a 24-105mm as a direct replacement. Out of pocket after selling existing equipment is ~$1,250.

Option 2: Keep the 60D but sell both existing lenses. Upgrade to the 16-35 F/4L. Out of pocket is ~$410. I'm also looking at the Sigma 18-35mm as that seems to get stellar reviews and would be wide enough for me if I move onto FF at some point.

So with option 2, I'm limiting myself on the longer end but it's also a significantly cheaper option. I shoot within that range 80% of the time so it doesn't seem like it would be a huge deal. The 70-200 F/4 is also on the list down the road, so maybe a few years from now I can migrate the 16-35 over to a FF and add the 70-200.

Last edited by ChiefNWA; Oct 10, 17 at 11:00 am
ChiefNWA is offline  
Old Oct 10, 17, 12:31 pm
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bay Area
Programs: DL SM, UA MP.
Posts: 10,541
6D Mk 2 was released recently but isn't getting great reviews.

There are rumors of Nikon and Canon going mirrorless with APS-C or FF sensors.

Myself, I'm staying with my D750 for now. Nikon just released the D850, which sets a new benchmark for prosumer.

But I'm not going heavier than my D750.

I could keep it for years or see if Canon/Nikon does something more interesting.
wco81 is offline  
Old Oct 10, 17, 12:34 pm
  #12  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: TPA
Programs: IHG Platinum, HHonors Gold, Marriott Gold, National EE
Posts: 1,183
Originally Posted by wco81 View Post
6D Mk 2 was released recently but isn't getting great reviews.

There are rumors of Nikon and Canon going mirrorless with APS-C or FF sensors.

Myself, I'm staying with my D750 for now. Nikon just released the D850, which sets a new benchmark for prosumer.

But I'm not going heavier than my D750.

I could keep it for years or see if Canon/Nikon does something more interesting.
Ya, I'm staying away from the 6D mkII, mainly for price but also due to the poor reviews regarding the dynamic range.
ChiefNWA is offline  
Old Oct 19, 17, 5:45 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: SFO
Posts: 3,125
They've been saying that for quite some time now I have the X-T2 and just love it! Glad I made the move away from Canon.

Originally Posted by wco81 View Post

There are rumors of Nikon and Canon going mirrorless with APS-C or FF sensors.
malgudi is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread