# Will the Canon 70D be a good upgrade for me? - Opinions please



## Nevermore1 (Feb 5, 2014)

Hi, I'm a "hobbyist" photographer (I always have at least a P&S camera on me) and am considering upgrading to the 70D from the 20D which I've had for 9 years.  I would like to get something that I won't feel the need to upgrade for another 8-10 years. I take photos primarily of landscapes, old buildings, wildlife (deer, squirrels, rabbits, snakes and some birds primarily), my cat and dogs and cemeteries/tombstones (for genealogy purposes, I am starting a "tombstone" project of the cemetery I live next to shortly).  I also occasionally take photos of my kids ( I would to take more but it gets annoying when my 3yo comes running and asks to see every shot as soon as it was taken) I may also be taking up photographing late model stock car races (my husband used to drive and is campaigning to get involved in racing again which will mean lots of time in the pits at the local track to get back in touch with old friends in the community).  I have approx $2000 to spend and was thinking of getting it with the dual kit lenses instead of just the body as my lenses are definitely on the cheap side and I don't know if they will work well with the 70D (or whatever I ultimately end up getting, I know they will "work" with the camera but will the camera work to its full potential with them).  I've listed the lenses I have below, would it make sense to get the camera with the dual lenses or just get the body and purchase a separate lens?  I am planning on trying to get a lens with more than 300mm zoom sometime in the next year after I've saved up some additional money as I would prefer one that I don't end up wanting to upgrade in a year or two.  

Hope I list these properly -
Canon EF-S 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6
Canon EF-S 55-250mm 1:4-5.6 IS II Macro
Canon EF 73-300mm 1:4-5.6 III

Thanks for any advice/opinions in advance and I apologize for my rambling!


----------



## goodguy (Feb 6, 2014)

The 70D is currently Canon best crop sensor camera, very good camera but if you plan on keeping it for the next 10 years and you have 2000$ I would try to aim higher, I would go with the Canon 6D.
Go full frame, it will hold it own for much longer being full frame and very good in low light.
In any case if you decide to go with the 70D I wouldnt call it a mistake, as I said a fine capable camera.
Also if you are planing to shoot racing car the 70D has an advantage over 6D with a better AF system.
Still I personally would get the 6D.


----------



## Lumens (Feb 6, 2014)

Note, the 6D will also require the purchase of new lenses as well as the EF-S lenses will not fit on the 6D.  So that leaves you with the one "Canon EF 73-300mm 1:4-5.6 III " that will fit the 6D.  That is good advice though if the money is available, Full Frame is always recommended when the cash is available.  

If the cash is not available there are improvements from the 20D to the 70D so I recommend you compare specifications - if it is stills you are most interested in the 70D may have some great new bells and whistles that don't impress you.  You say you don't do much video and that is where the improvements are the greatest.  I do understand there is some improvement in low light images, but I don't own the 70D so can't speak to that.  I have heard both "big difference" and "no difference" depending on which review you read.

In short the 20D is still a great camera and you might do better to invest in better glass rather than camera.  You will need to do some research and come to your own conclusion.


----------



## Gavjenks (Feb 6, 2014)

I completely agree, the 6D.
70D I would recommend for video, so if you don't do that, it is wasteful I'd say to not get the full frame and to spend so much on a crop. The price is mostly for its video friendly AF system.

Lenses aren't a huge deal. Yes you need all full frame lenses, but you can sell your EF-S one(s) for like $150, which means you get a free 50mm f/1.8 ($100). So you're at 2 without spending anything.
And then with the kit lens on the 6D (24-105L f/4), you have a good lineup.  Definitely get the kit lens. It's only like $300-400 extra in the kit, still under $2000 I think, and its used resale price is like $600 so you really cannot go wrong. If you don't like it for some reason just immediately sell it and probably make money...

So 70-300
50 1.8
24-105 4

Perfectly usable lens collection, all full frame. Do eeeet!


----------



## lambertpix (Feb 6, 2014)

The 70D would be a marked improvement over the 20D.  One of the great tricks of buying camera equipment is that covering the gamut of landscapes to sports photography requires either multiple cameras or a compromise somewhere.  More money solves all of your problems.  ;-)

A full-frame camera like the 6D will be very good for landscapes & portraits, but somewhat less outstanding for moving subjects (mainly due to a simplified autofocus system).  It's going to give you great low-light performance, though, which could be important if you're racing under the lights.  As Lumens mentioned, you'll need to replace any EF-S lenses you own -- EF lenses are fine.

The 70D is good at moving subjects, and it's got some great video features, if that floats your boat.  It's going to be harder to produce stunning landscapes & portraits, though you might not notice much of a difference with casual use.  It's also not going to be as good at low-light conditions as the 6D, but it'll be quite a bit better than your 20D.  The smaller sensors on the 70D (as well as your 20D) also make your lenses behave as if they're longer than they are (with respect to field-of-view), so bear that in mind if you contemplate the 6D, as well.  As far as compromises go, the 70D isn't a bad option, IMO.


----------



## Gavjenks (Feb 6, 2014)

Oh motorcar racing with more autofocus points is indeed a legitimate point.  If that's really going to be your _main _focus, then the 6D might not be ideal. But even then, I'd probably suggest a used 7D, not the 70D. Much less money, and all the autofocus shenanigans you'd ever want, plus 8 FPS.

If racing is going to be less than or equal to maybe 30% of your shooting, though, I wouldn't worry about it. 6D can do fine, and offers many more advantages for pretty much everything else you want to shoot. For cars, with a 6D, I'd probably simply use ambush focusing (focus somewhere you know theyll be and then snap at right moment without needing AF right then). Anything on a track is easy to do this for, and any AF system works fine. Not as flexible, but not enough of a difference to warrant a different body.


----------



## jaomul (Feb 6, 2014)

While it may be in Good faith to recommend a fullframe camera sometimes I think it is a bit misguided. With Canon if you have efs lenses only, recommending a fullframe is the same as recommending a completely new system.

The 70d will be a very nice upgrade to your 20d. Better autofocus, better low light ability and 20mp allows for a good amount of cropping. It's a matter of opinion but I think tilting screens are great.

If you shoot or want to shoot a lot of video the 18-135 stm Lens is supposedly good. I had a 55-250 non stm and it was great. I think the stm version is as good with the benefit of silent video autofocus, which is where the 70d has the advantage over every other dslr.

So yes, the 70d is a nice upgrade from your 20d


----------



## Derrel (Feb 6, 2014)

I looked at and demo'd the 70D two weekends ago, with the 'new' 18-135 STM lens...I was impressed, especially for the price. I own a 20D....have had it for like eight years...it feels very clunky and crudely-fashioned compared to a 70D. I think you'd be better served to SKIP the 18-55 kit zoom, an get the wider-ranging 18-135 STM lens, and SKIP the 55-250, and then buy the 70-300mm L-series zoom as your "good" long lens. A 55-250 AND a 70-300 is just excessive duplication, and besides the 70-300 L zoom is probably THE best 70-300 zoom from ANY maker right now.

I dunno...you kept a 20D for NINE years; I think you sound like the kind of shooter who would do better off to buy the "better" equipment, like the 18-135 STM lens AND the 70-300-L series, and then KEEP and use those for another decade. I see the 18-55 and the 55-250 as while not throwaway lenses, as..."stepping stones"...I say skip the stepping stones, and go for the BIG rocks.


----------



## Nevermore1 (Feb 6, 2014)

Thanks everyone for the informative replies.  I will look at the 6D as well.

Derrell - Yes, I have had it for 9 years.  I purchased it with my tax return when I got engaged (my Mom was mad because she thought I should have put the money towards towards a bigger ring, I get more use from the camera than a ring on finger IMO).  My husband said I could upgrade with this years return.   I wasbthinking of trying to sell it but then my daughter asked to take photography in school next year so she will be using it.  I don't want to get a 16yo a brand new camera to drop and break or have stolen in school.  I figure most kids would ignore this one since it is "well used".

I do want to invest in some of the high end lenses and am hoping to purchase at least one sometime in the next year.  The 70-300 that I have is one I bought for the small amount of extra zoom and it was dirt cheap (used) so I couldn't find a reason to not buy it.  I avoid camera shops because when I go in I want to buy.  I have a huge one next to my work and have been late coming back from lunch due to browsing for what I want but can't always afford.


----------



## lambertpix (Feb 6, 2014)

Nevermore1 said:


> I was thinking of trying to sell it but then my daughter asked to take photography in school next year so she will be using it.



Good call.  That was my excuse for upgrading to a 7D.  ;-)


----------



## goodguy (Feb 6, 2014)

Nevermore1 said:


> I wasbthinking of trying to sell it but then my daughter asked to take photography in school next year so she will be using it. I don't want to get a 16yo a brand new camera to drop and break or have stolen in school. I figure most kids would ignore this one since it is "well used".


 Thats a good idea, I doubt you would get much for it anyways, in my house everybody except the cat has his/her own camera.
Few years ago before I bought my first DSLR (Sony a300) I had a Canon P&S which I loved, when I came back from work my wife said we need a new camera because the kids played with the Canon dropped it twice and its broken.
The first time it was still ok so they had to see what was the braking point of the camera, sadly they found it, right smack on the lens when it was extended.
Since then everybody has their own camera LOL

Since you are a person who buy and keeps the camera for a long time I say consider the 6D and listen to Darrel, the guy makes good sense with the lenses.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 6, 2014)

Who is Darrel and he could not possibly make more sense than Derrel :mrgreen:


----------



## Gavjenks (Feb 6, 2014)

> With Canon if you have efs lenses only, recommending a fullframe is the same as recommending a completely new system.


Well yeah, I would still recommend going to full frame probably if switching to nikon, too =)

The 70d is just so damn expensive for what it is, that it seems silly if you don't use it for what it was specifically made for, which is video.


----------



## JerryLove (Feb 7, 2014)

I know you are looking to keep for 10 years; but I have to wonder if you might not be better served (since video is not on your list) hitting something a little farther down the chain and going for 5 years. Or the saved money could be put into a great lens. A t3i and 70-200 F/4 L would fit. Go used and you can get the IS version.

A switch to Nikon is something worth considering, esp if you decide to go full-frame (thus devalidating some of your existing lenses). The better low-light performance might be useful and the higher resolution should make obsolescence later.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 7, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> > With Canon if you have efs lenses only, recommending a fullframe is the same as recommending a completely new system.
> 
> 
> Well yeah, I would still recommend going to full frame probably if switching to nikon, too =)
> ...



Specifically made for video? Hmmmm. I know these 'which camera decisions' can be maddening. If the 70D was specifically made for video it would make it a much easier choice.

However, since the OP does mention wildlife would he ignore the crop factor, the continuous (from Cameralabs) *"Canon EOS 70D continuous shooting*
In terms of continuous shooting, the EOS 70D offers an impressive 7fps, a decent upgrade over the 5.3fps of the EOS 60D and only a tad below the 8fps boasted by the EOS 7D. All are quicker than the somewhat pedestrian 4.5fps of the full-frame EOS 6D"

A quick check on just Amazon. 70D $1100, 6D $1750, 7D $1400. (correct me if I am wrong). 
I would consider the video capabilities of the 70D more like a really nice bonus for the price and still go with it over a 6D. If wildlife/birding/motorcar trumps landscapes and buildings.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 7, 2014)

Well I'm a Nikon guy myself but jaca's wife shoots canon and her pictures are amazing.

Jaca also shoots canon - and his wifes pics are amazing.

Lol - just kidding of course big guy.  What can I say sometimes I just can't help myself 

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 8, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Well I'm a Nikon guy myself but jaca's wife shoots canon and her pictures are amazing.
> 
> Jaca also shoots canon - and his wifes pics are amazing.
> 
> ...



:lmao:  I need to trick her into posting something worthy of getting a band.  I also need to break the news to her that she is using the camera all wrong.  It's specifically made for video.....RTFM.  LOL


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 8, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Well I'm a Nikon guy myself but jaca's wife shoots canon and her pictures are amazing.
> ...



Good lord man don't tell her that - if she ever gets her hands on a real camera we'll never keep up.. lol


----------



## Nevermore1 (Feb 8, 2014)

JerryLove said:


> I know you are looking to keep for 10 years; but I have to wonder if you might not be better served (since video is not on your list) hitting something a little farther down the chain and going for 5 years. Or the saved money could be put into a great lens. A t3i and 70-200 F/4 L would fit. Go used and you can get the IS version.
> 
> A switch to Nikon is something worth considering, esp if you decide to go full-frame (thus devalidating some of your existing lenses). The better low-light performance might be useful and the higher resolution should make obsolescence later.



I did think about switching to Nikon but decided to stay with Canon since that is what a very good friend of mine has as well.  We will often go out with each other for the day to take photos and it is nice to be able to exchange lenses together based on we want/need at that particular moment.  Since neither one of us has much $ we tend to verify with the other before we purchase a new lens or some other accessory to make sure the other doesn't already have it.  That way we have more to play with when we go out and if one of us is going out alone we will stop off at the others place and raid their supplies.  Of course he would be thrilled if I switched, that way he could borrow my stuff permanently if my daughter didn't beat him to it (as mentioned before she will be inheriting my 20D when I upgrade, originally my friend was going to get it but his GF purchased him a new T3i for X-Mas since he killed the shutter button on his old one from using it so much).


----------



## JerryLove (Feb 8, 2014)

If you had bought the $2k camera 10 years ago, you would be trading in your 6MP 10D now.
If you had gone for the $1k 6MP 300D instead, you would have gotten a T1i 16MP 5 years ago which you would now be about to trade in.

There is, I think, value in a more rapid trade-up cycle of lower-cost camera. I believe that you face diminishing returns as you move up the camera lines (unless there is a specific need not met by a lesser camera). 

You mentioned a mechanical failure of a camera of a friend of yours. That's another thing to consider when planning a 10-year purchase. A lesser camera also makes absorbing a post-warranty loss easier.


----------



## Nevermore1 (Feb 8, 2014)

JerryLove - Valid points.  I think the failure of my friends camera was due to so much use.  He received it as a hand-me-down and would spend approximately 6-10 hours a day with it in the woods and swamp taking photos of anything and everything (the county saw some of his stuff and he now has a few photos on display in some of the govt buildings in the area).  I would guess he was taking nearly a thousand shots a day for nearly 3 years with that particular camera (photography is his "new addiction" after he gave up another bad one).  I just wish I had as much time as he does to take photos!


----------



## Nevermore1 (Feb 10, 2014)

Just wanted to thank everyone again for their input.  I ended up getting the 70D today with the 18-135mm IS STM kit lens.  I am still looking at _possibly_ getting a used full frame (probably the 6D but not 100% sure) sometime in the next year or so.  I'm currently waiting on the Tamron 150-600mm lens to come out.  I am hoping that with that lens (if it gets good reviews, I'll wait till it's been out a few months before getting it) and what I currently have that it will be enough to keep me happy until I can start saving up for some of the really nice lenses and slowly upgrade them over time.  I haven't had time to play with the new camera yet but am sure I will like it (the battery is still charging)!

Anyways, thanks again for all the help!  I don't do much posting but have done tons of reading on the forums and am learning alot.  The one thing I've noticed, that I really like, is that everyone on here seems to get along pretty well even if they don't agree on something, you don't see that on most forums these days!


----------



## CmazzJK (Feb 12, 2014)

Gavjenks said:


> I completely agree, the 6D.
> 70D I would recommend for video, so if you don't do that, it is wasteful I'd say to not get the full frame and to spend so much on a crop. The price is mostly for its video friendly AF system.
> 
> Lenses aren't a huge deal. Yes you need all full frame lenses, but you can sell your EF-S one(s) for like $150, which means you get a free 50mm f/1.8 ($100). So you're at 2 without spending anything.
> ...



Everywhere I look the 6D with 24-105 kit lens is 2500.


----------

