# Canon 70D, Canon 6D, or Canon 5DMkIII



## jdsfighter

So since I've been on a roll asking about what I should buy next, my next logical progression is my next camera.

I'm currently using the T3i, and I have the following lenses - 
Canon ef-s 18-55mm
Canon ef-s 55-250mm
Canon ef 50mm f/1.8
Canon ef 28-90mm
Canon ef 70-300mm 
Canon ef 70-200mm f/2.8

After renting, and making up my mind I'll have either the Canon 24-70mm or the Tamron 24-70mm. And once I get that one, I'll be investing in an ultra wide angle

Now in my personal time I prefer shooting anything and everything, animals, people, street photography, landscapes, nature, architecture, etc. Professionally, I do mostly portraits, but have had a few inquiries from schools in regards to sports.

My question is which camera should I go to next. 
In my head, my justification is as such - with the 70D I'd have a fantastic camera, but it lacks a full frame sensor. With the 6D, I'm full frame, with excellent low light performance (a necessity), and many many features. And with the 5DMkIII phenomenal auto focus, the best of the best in all the features up until the 1DX.

I'm just at a complete loss, from everything I've seen, aside from the newer AF system, the 6D seems absolutely on par with the 5DMkIII, but will I miss the AF if I'm making due right now, or will I eventually be kicking myself in the butt for not spending just a bit more.


----------



## rexbobcat

If you want to photograph sports and still be able to make use of your EF-S lenses, get the 70D. I think that camera has the autofocus from the 7D, which is quicker at autofocusing in Servo mode than the 6D.

And we also don't know about the sensor performance of the 70D yet, so there's that. It might be surprisingly excellent.

If you are wanting the best high ISO performance without worrying too much about the autofocus, then I would get the 6D. The images from the 6D at 6400 ISO look like my 60D at 1600 ISO. It's pretty incredible.


----------



## Derrel

The way I see it, you need TWO lenses for most assignments: a 24-70 and a 70-200, both f/2.8. To make that work, you need a FF body. Since you're still young and starting out, I think the price difference of the 5D-3 vs the 6D favors the newer, less-costly 6D body. Ideally, two bodies would be good to own; one as a main body, one as a backup body, and/or one FX, one APS-C, to leverage lenses...when you need to put more pixels on distant subjects, an APS-C sensor camera is a positive, not a negative. For most people/social stuff, I view APS-C as a liability.

Until you have regular paychecks coming in from photography gigs, I can't see the 5D-3 as being that good of an investment. I "think" the 70D will be Canon's best APS-C camera.

I do not see much value or utility in the lower-end EF-S lenses from Canon.


----------



## wes1007

rexbobcat said:


> If you are wanting the best high ISO performance without worrying too much about the autofocus, then I would get the 6D. The images from the 6D at 6400 ISO look like my 60D at 1600 ISO. It's pretty incredible.



I can vouch for the 6D. ISO 6400 is fairly clean. 

The AF system is a bit depressing, 2 points more than my old 1100D..., but the center point is suppose to focus without a hitch in moonlight or something crazy... 

I personally wouldn't go for the 5D unless I was making a fair amount of cash from photography


----------



## Biev

I bought the 5D a few months ago and I'm very happy with the decision (coming from a 600D), even though I'm not (yet) making any money as a photographer.  I've never used the 6D, though, so I can't compare the two.  Still, for the price, the 6D's specs seem quite impressive.

Keep in mind that rumors are (and yes, they are only rumors, albeit persistent ones) that we will see a 7D mark II early next year.  Until then, the 70D seems like a decent machine, but the new 7D may (or may not) blow it out of the sky (with a matching price tag, no doubt).


----------



## Gavjenks

> Now in my personal time I prefer shooting anything and everything,  animals, people, street photography, landscapes, nature, architecture,  etc. Professionally, I do mostly portraits, but have had a few inquiries  from schools in regards to sports.


 The vast majority of the things you listed would be better with a full frame, especially the portraits that you say you mostly do at the moment. Which IMO makes a full frame a clear choice over a 70D if you can afford it.  I don't think you should buy a crop frame on the off chance that you MIGHT do SOME sports photography. You should capitalize on what you know is your bread and butter.

Then between the 5D MkIII and the 6D? Again, unless you know for sure that sports will be your bread and butter, it is not very justifiable IMO to spent that much more money for a camera that is basically a more action-specialized 6D, if you don't even know that you will have any particular tendency to do action shots or need the AF points (for portraits, they're somewhere between frivolous and completely useless, depending on your style, and considering that the 6D DOES have side points, just not as many/as dense).

Also the 6D has better noise control, by about 1 stop over the 5D MkIII.  The 6D is also lighter and has GPS/Wifi if you care about those things. So you're not even paying for a no-compromises upgrade. You're paying that much more to GIVE UP some things and gain others.

As I've said before,* I don't think the 5D MkIII is even 1$ better than the 6D.*  They both have compromises compared to the other, and even if they were the same exact price, I would advise you to get the 6D if you wanted the things the 6D has, and the 5D MkIII if you wanted the things it has.  Given the huge price difference this changes to "Always buy the 6D, unless you are a hardcore flying bird or sports photographer that absolutely *needs *a slightly faster framerate and more AF points."  

Also consider that if you are such a hardcore action photographer to pay that much more for that kind of compromised difference, then maybe you should just consider the 1DX anyway...! If you can drop over a grand to get a few more focus points and give up ISO, then why not drop a couple more grand to get all of the above plus a lot more? Even more points and AF software, RGB metering, 12 FPS, good noise, *and *even more rugged construction?

Bottom line:
Action photographer? The 1DX has much superior capabilities to the 5DMkIII disproportionately to its extra cost (i.e. it's much more than twice as useful at less than twice the cost)
Non-Action photographer? The 6D is probably even more useful than the 5D MkIII is at this, *and *costs way less
Making the 5D MkIII overall pretty much obsolete IMO, except for the rare action photographer who can for some reason afford $3500 but can't even remotely consider a $6500 camera


edit: wrong MP listed


----------



## TCampbell

The EF-S 18-55 is _very_ inexpensive and if you plan to keep your T3i as a backup camera you'll still need that lens anyway.  If you plan to sell the T3i then the buyer will probably want a kit lens -- so you can just sell the 18-55 along with the camera.

I wouldn't lose any sleep over the EF-S 55-250.  I _gave_ my copy away... literally.  I found it to be a bit disappointing.  It was a nice cost-saving lens but that really is it's main feature.  

The 6D will blow you away on ISO performance (as will the 5D III).  Really I think _the_ advantage of the 5D III is that focusing system (although I did have to do a lot of reading and testing and reading and testing to get the feel for WHY they have so many modes and why you'd pick one mode over another... and also how to tune the mode to follow focus.)

If you _really_ think you'll be doing a lot of action photography, I'd go for the 5D III.  But based on what you say you are mostly shooting, I think the 6D is probably your camera (don't forget the 5D III does not have WiFi or GPS -- those are separate accessories rather than built-in like they are on the 6D.)  Canon gives you a free iOS or Android app that lets you wirelessly control the 6D.


----------



## karrief35

Hi. Do you know if that's the only dslr (60D) that has wifi capabilities? Besides Nikons 3200.


----------



## Gavjenks

karrief35 said:


> Hi. Do you know if that's the only dslr (60D) that has wifi capabilities? Besides Nikons 3200.



I'm pretty sure the 60D does not have wireless, but is merely compatible with eye fi cards that you have to add separately. Unless one comes with the camera, in which case I guess that is basically having wifi.

Anyway, the 70D will also have truly integrated wifi, and should be shipping very soon.

And the 6D also has wifi.


----------

