# Suggestions for new camera body?



## crunchymama (Mar 11, 2016)

I am far from being a professional photographer, but I'm enthusiastic about my hobby. 

I took photos of my friend's birth recently and I'm hooked. It was amazing, and challenging. I would love to shoot more births so I'm looking to upgrade my camera. I currently use an old Rebel xsi. I purchased a Sigma 30 mm 1.4 lens just for the birth shoot, it was awesome. Photos actually came out beautifully but the noise level at 1600 iso is pretty steep...

I'm looking at a 70d, would this give me a big boost in low light conditions over my current camera body? I have been reading specs all day and I guess I am just looking for some advice from real people. I want to stick with crop sensor as I have accumulated a nice little collection of lenses. 

Any input appreciated, thanks!


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 11, 2016)

Would it give you a boost in low light?  A little, roughly about 0.4 fstops, so not a huge gain but noticeable.  Unfortunately high ISO to low noise is not an area in which Canon really excels, at least not in APS-C sensor cameras.


----------



## jaomul (Mar 11, 2016)

I know you can compare specs online and a site may tell you that a newer Canon gives 0.4 of a stop better iso performance but I believe it's better than that in photos. 

I had the 50d and think the newer 18mp sensor on the 550d /t2i was a good bit better. The 70d is supposed to be better again, and the 50d is supposed to be about equal in this as the xsi. ISO at 1600 with a 70d should be pretty good


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 11, 2016)

jaomul said:


> I know you can compare specs online and a site may tell you that a newer Canon gives 0.4 of a stop better iso performance but I believe it's better than that in photos.
> 
> I had the 50d and think the newer 18mp sensor on the 550d /t2i was a good bit better. The 70d is supposed to be better again, and the 50d is supposed to be about equal in this as the xsi. ISO at 1600 with a 70d should be pretty good



Well expressing it in fstops is really the only way I can relate some idea as to "how much better" it is - I don't really have a lot of options there.  I could say that the 70d is "better" than the XSI but without some form of measurement it's not really all that useful of a statement.  The only objective measurement I know of is the fstop difference.


----------



## jaomul (Mar 11, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > I know you can compare specs online and a site may tell you that a newer Canon gives 0.4 of a stop better iso performance but I believe it's better than that in photos.
> ...



This certainly wasn't a shot at you or your explanation.

I know dxo or snapsort  is the go to source to get the accurate numbers for these comparisons, I look at them myself.

I would read that the 70d is 0.4 of a stop better than my 50d was, the 550d was similar in theory(to the 70d so a little better than the 50d). That to me would suggest that generally the 50d at about iso 1250 should be similar to the 550d at 1600, but in usage generally and unscientific I would find that the 550d was a good bit better than that. I'm not sure how well these chart tests represent real usage


----------



## crunchymama (Mar 11, 2016)

Thanks for that input guys! So maybe not the huge jump in light sensitivity I was hoping for but still a noticeable improvement. Perhaps if I truly want to go down this path I should think about full frame. 

Another issue I ran into was with the low light conditions my camera was searching searching searching to focus so I'd end up having to switch to manual focus. I'm wondering if I would see better results there as well.


----------



## beagle100 (Mar 11, 2016)

crunchymama said:


> I am far from being a professional photographer, but I'm enthusiastic about my hobby.
> 
> I took photos of my friend's birth recently and I'm hooked. It was amazing, and challenging. I would love to shoot more births so I'm looking to upgrade my camera. I currently use an old Rebel xsi. I purchased a Sigma 30 mm 1.4 lens just for the birth shoot, it was awesome. Photos actually came out beautifully but the noise level at 1600 iso is pretty steep...
> 
> ...



70D *refurbished* is good a good upgrade
  (certainly better "IQ"image quality than Nikon crops !)


----------



## TCampbell (Mar 12, 2016)

If being able to shoot at higher ISO while keeping noise levels low is what you want, then you may want to check out the full-frame sensor bodies.

The 6D is considerably better at ISO vs. noise than the 70D (or than any APS-C body really).  The downside is that it costs about $400 more.  If you can catch it when it's in stock as a refurb (on the Canon store) then you can get it for about $1100 (usually it's closer to $1400 new).  A 70D body (new) is $1000.  

It does require full frame (EF) lenses.  You can't use any of your EF-S lenses on a full-frame body.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 12, 2016)

I shot with Majeed for over a year on 25 or so joint outdoor trips...the 70D's performance at medium ISO levels is not that good compared to even a 2009-intro Nikon FX 24 megapixel. His 6D image quality at higher ISO levels was notably better than the 7D...it seems to me that the 6D might actually be Canon's best performing camera in terms of sensor performance, but it has been put in a body with low specifications, probably as a way to protect sales of the 5D-III. Of course it still has that 2.5 Exposure Vaule lower maximum dynamic range problem Canon sensors have become known for. Nikon D7200 vs Canon EOS 6D | DxOMark

The real issue is what lurks in the darker areas, when the image is brightened in software. This is where cameras using sensors manufactured by Sony show industry-leading performance.Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

See for yourself what that means. In this screen capture I made this morning. Sony made sensors versus sensors made in-house by Canon. You want a cleaner image and the ability to shoot in dimmer conditions and then brighten the image later, in software, by say a full four EV, without a horrible amount of ugly noise rearing its head? The choice is clear.


----------



## robbins.photo (Mar 12, 2016)

beagle100 said:


> crunchymama said:
> 
> 
> > I am far from being a professional photographer, but I'm enthusiastic about my hobby.
> ...



Ok, well I haven't recommended you switch to Nikon because you mentioned you already have an assortment of canon lenses.  Beagles assertion that the 70d performs better in low light than any Nikon aps-c sensor simply isn't true I'm afraid.  My old d5200 was much better in low light than the 70d, as is my current 7100, and those are both older models that have been replaced by even more advanced options.

Recall when I mentioned before that the 70d would give you roughly a .4 stop advantage over your current body in high iso to noise?  My trusty old 7100 would give you a .8 stop advantage as I recall.

Canon makes a fine camera, and they do have advantages in some areas when comparing features, but high iso low noise is not their strong suit.


----------

