Canon 7D Mark II or Canon 6D?

[mmbad]

Hi guys! I am a new photographer and am debating between the Canon 7D Mark II and the Canon 6D. I've been doing lots of research but I need your help on which I should choose and why. I am mainly going to be doing portraits, children photography and some landscape.

Please help as this has been a really tough decision.


Thank you!
Mary

[Manfred M]

I'm not a Canon shooter, so I can't comment on the one or the other in any detail.

My question would tend to be why are you looking at full frame and why are you looking at Canon DSLRs versus some of the other options? What lenses are you considering and why?

The main reason I ask is that if you are a new photographer, you are looking at a fairly expensive entry into photography with those two models.

[Black Pearl]

For portrait photography it is more about the lenses you buy than the camera so really you should be asking for opinions on the ones you've looked at and advice on what others would recommend. Once you have the lens (lenses) you are happy with buy a camera to fit them to.

The other thing to consider is portrait photography very often involves additional lighting so what do you intend to buy, what modifiers are you thinking about, where will you shooting, what is your experience in handling lighting, are you intending to do this as a hobby or a profession and what is your total budget?

[inkista]

Hi guys! I am a new photographer and am debating between the Canon 7D Mark II and the Canon 6D. I've been doing lots of research but I need your help on which I should choose and why. I am mainly going to be doing portraits, children photography and some landscape.

Please help as this has been a really tough decision.

The 7DMkII is mainly viewed as a fast-action camera. It has a super-sophisticated autofocus system, and is a crop body, which aids with longer lenses for things like shooting wildlife and sports (i.e., more typical fast action shots). It's seen as a higher-end prosumer body. Kids can be fast-action subjects.

The 6D is a full-frame prosumer body. It's typically not great for fast action, but better for non-moving subjects. It's possibly more specialized for portraits and landscapes. But it's more of a lower-end prosumer body. A full-frame analog to, say, the XXD bodies. The full-frame analog to the 7DMkII is more the 5DMkIII/IV. There's also the fact that the 7DMkII is a three-years newer model than the 6D.

Both of these are pretty high-end cameras, and very expensive, and not what most newcomers to dSLRs are likely to choose right off the bat, because of the expense. Like any sort of advanced tool, you have to learn how to use it to get the most out of it. The majority of cameras outperform their owners these days. Also, lower end cameras in the same generation/format tend to share the same sensor/processor, so image quality would be identical between higher and lower end bodies. Higher-end bodies are all about usability features; not necessarily image quality.

Portrait shooting tends to be more about light than about cameras. Landscape shooting tends to be more about technique and timing than about cameras. Child photography tends to be more about wrangling/relating to the child than about the cameras.

Also, if you've never shot with an interchangeable lens camera before, you will want to realize that the pricetag on a camera kit (i.e., camera body and lens) is only the beginning of the spending. If you really do get into this, you're liable to spend 2x to 3x as much as you did on the kit on the system you end up with. That's why most folks set their sights on a $500 camera at the beginning--adding three more lenses, a bag, post-processing software, a tripod and some flashes can easily mean $2000 spending total. You start with a $1500 camera kit, and you might end up spending closer to $3000-$5000.

What's your budget?

[William W]

I concur with all that’s been written by: Manfred; Robin and Kathy

I’ll add, from a different way of looking at your choice – IF you have the money to spend on a 7DMkII or a 6D and then, assuming that you also have the money to spend on lenses that will allow those cameras to shine, buy either.

If you choose the 7D MkII then buy the EF-S 17 to 55 F/2.8 IS USM.

If you choose to buy the 6D then buy the EF 24 to 70 F/2.8LMkII USM.

The point is, in my experience tutoring students during their two year matriculation course in Art (Major Photography), not any one Student could outgrow, or even come close to mastering either of those tools during two years of rigorous study and practical assignments: so either choice will keep you going as "a new photographer", for many years.

WW

[Donald]

An excellent reply from Kathy, immediately above. Says exactly what needs to be said and says it well.

[mmbad]

Thank you ALL for your responses! These are extremely helpful. The reason I was debating between these two, is because I was told by two different people that these are the cameras I should consider. Although these are great cameras, after reading all of your responses, I agree with all of you and don't think these cameras are a good fit for me. Especially since I am new to DSLR cameras.

Just to give you all a little background, I am pretty good at photo retouching and design and photography has always been a passion of mine. I always find myself helping friends and others retouch/fix their pictures that other photographers take. So instead of doing that, I'd rather get into photography myself and use my own vision, I just need to learn about the different types of camera and lenses.

So maybe I should start off with a cheaper camera, and buy different lenses as many of you mentioned. Do you guys think the Canon T5i or something similar is a good starting point? Also, any lenses you recommend I should start out with?


Thank you all again for your help. Hopefully one day I am as knowledgable on this topic as all of you.

-Mary

[rpcrowe]

Mary,

I cannot speak for other brands because I have been a dedicated Canon guy through many years of digital photography, beginning with the Canon 10D. However, I am sure that there are other camera brands which might also serve your needs.

Regarding Canon cameras and as far as a lower price alternate to the 7D2 or 6D; I might suggest the Canon 70D which is available from Canon USA as a factory refurbished kit with the 18-135mm STM lens for $879.00 U.S. Dollars. I haven't researched prices on this camera/lens in other areas than the USA. If you would update your profile to include the general area in which you are located, we might better provide more pertinent advice.

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/c...it-refurbished

Regarding the T5i: I don't like the Canon Rebel line of Canon DSLR cameras. It's not because that don't produce excellent imagery, they are capable of producing that. I just don't like the control systems of the Rebel cameras which require reverting to the menu to adjust the shooting parameters in many cases. I think that the dual dial system with which the xD and xxD cameras (such as the 6D and 70D) are equipped is quicker, easier and more fun to use.

I shoot with both full format and crop sensor cameras (including the 5D2 and the 7D2) and would have no problems using a crop sensor for any of your photo aims as evidenced by these two images both shot with crop cameras:

landscape...


portrait...


The 18-135mm lens is a all-purpose zoom of very good quality. Starting off with a camera such as the 70D and a lens such as the 18-135mm will put you into a position to shoot everything from portraits to landscapes. I like a longer focal length lens for portraits. A focal length of 100-135mm is what I often use when shooting portraits with a crop sensor camera.

The 70D has one feature that the 7D2 doesn't include, that is an articulating LCD which is very handy for shooting video. In fact, IMO, the 70D would be better than the 7D2 for shooting video and the STM 18-135mm would also be great as a video lens..

The 7D2 might be a bit better for very fast action and it does have dual memory card slots but, at the price line that the 70D kit is being offered, it would be hard to beat as a value.

As far as buying a refurbished camera, I have purchased a large number of cameras that way. In fact, the only camera which I now own that was not purchased as refurbished is the 5D2 which I purchased used because I got an excellent price.

[TheBigE]

I was in a simliar position 3 years ago - reviewing different models, features, etc. Ultimately, it just came down to ergonomics. I set a limit in terms of price and just went to the camera store and picked up each camera in my price range - the one the felt the best in my hands won. This included holding the camera, the dials and buttons location - and just the basic menu structure.

Good luck with your choice.

[chauncey]

To add to what Kathy Li said...photography, if you really get into it, is a never-ending income drainer.
Consider lenses, computer and software, monitors, lighting, and...time. The journey is never-ending.

[rpcrowe]

To add to what Kathy Li said...photography, if you really get into it, is a never-ending income drainer.
Consider lenses, computer and software, monitors, lighting, and...time. The journey is never-ending.

It is especially an income drainer if you don't get the full capabilities out of the equipment you already own. As in golf and fishing, many folks are looking for the "golden secret", a piece of equipment which will elevate their photography into greatness. While sometimes a piece of gear will certainly help you increase the quality of your imagery, (as an example: Brian's macro-photography efforts increased in quality sharply soon after he purchased a dedicated Tamron macro lens); gear alone will not make you a better photographer.

Chasing better pictures by purchasing gear alone will be frustrating. A photographer needs a minimum kit for the type of photography desired. As an example, you are not going to do well in sports or wildlife photography without a long focal length lens and if you desire to work with low available light photography a fast lens and a camera that can achieve decent imagery at relatively high ISO levels is pretty well necessary. However, once you have the basic equipment, it is then a function of getting to know that equipment and then...

You need to sharpen the most essential piece of equipment for any type of photography - your brain

[inkista]

... I'd rather get into photography myself and use my own vision, I just need to learn about the different types of camera and lenses.

Important Camera Features

To me, there are only three features a camera has to have to really learn photography deeply:

• Full manual mode (so you can explicitly control exposure settings and make tradeoffs the way you want to)
• RAW capability (so you have the most post-processing latitude, without losing data to compression)
• A flash hotshoe (optional; but without one it's much tougher to do off-camera lighting)

So, I've never owned a digital camera that didn't have the first two features. And I will probably never buy another that doesn't have the third. These are the general big differences between using a dedicated camera or a smartphone camera, too (although I think iOS 10 just added RAW capability).

What can you spend? What do you need?

Your first task in deciding what camera you want is to set a budget for yourself. And tell yourself honestly if that's really all you can spend, or if it's just all you can spend right now. Budget is, for most people, the biggest limiting factor in what gear they can own.

Then assess--do you have the computer system/software/backup facilities you need for photography? (I'm assuming yes, since you're post-processing for other folks, but many of us like using Adobe Lightroom and/or Photoshop and those licenses cost). Not only are you possibly getting into endless spending on gear , you're also going to be endlessly adding image files to your system. Do you have room? Is it backed up?

Camera gear isn't just about the camera and lens. You'll also need memory cards, and probably multiple batteries, since once your battery is drained, you just have an expensive brick.

What Type of Camera?

So maybe I should start off with a cheaper camera, and buy different lenses as many of you mentioned. Do you guys think the Canon T5i or something similar is a good starting point? Also, any lenses you recommend I should start out with?

Actually, it's time to figure out what type of camera you need to look at. I think diving immediately to Canon dSLRs models and lenses may be a bit soon at your stage of decision-making.

What's your budget? How much weight are you willing to lug about to take pictures? How willing are you to change lenses? What/how do you plan to shoot?

Interchangeable Lens "System" Cameras

Your first decision is probably whether or not you can afford to go with an interchangeable lens system. If your budget is under $1500 total/over time, then likely this isn't for you. Or if you do get into it, you'll need to be happy purchasing used gear, and lower-end/mid-grade gear. You won't really be able to take full advantage of the system if you can't buy much of the system. For some folks, that's fine. For others, not so much. You have to be a judge of this yourself.

What you get for the high cost is a huge amount of versatility and the ability to tailor your lens choice to your specific subject matter. You can get one lens for landscapes, another for portraits, and a third for chasing munchkins around the house. You can add off-camera lighting. You can typically use a tripod and a cable release or wireless remote. These are the most capable cameras. And which system will work for you best depends on the haptics (feel-in-the-hands), the lens selection, and the third-party support. And you have two types of cameras to choose from: dSLR or mirrorless.

dSLRs

dSLR systems are derived from film SLRs. The big two brands are Canon and Nikon, but Pentax and Sony also make dSLR/dSLT cameras that use the same basic technology. There's a mirror inside the camera that reflects the light coming in through the taking lens up into the viewfinder, so what you see is what the camera sees. These cameras are super-responsive and fast-autofocusing as well, because they have a separate dedicated sensor array just for autofocus. But they are mechanically pretty complex, and your viewfinder is optical, not digital. Some viewfinders use an LCD overlay to add information to what you see through the viewfinder, but you're mostly relying on LED information around the edge of the frame to tell you your settings/metering, etc. These are also the biggest/heaviest camera/lens combinations.

Mirrorless

The newer class of mirrorless cameras is basically doing a lot of the same things that dSLRs can do (including using the same size sensors), but is using compact-digital camera technology. There's no mirror and most viewfinders are electronic, that is, small video screens, that directly display the data on the main image sensor. There's no separate autofocus sensor array, so autofocus performance can be slower and less responsive, so for fast-action shooting, mirrorless is a step behind dSLRs. But the viewfinder being completely electronic means that the image you see can be manipulated. For example, you can get exposure simulation in the viewfinder--something you can only do on a dSLR with the LCD display on the back. You can get focus peaking (where the camera highlights the sharpest in-focus bits of the image with a color so you can see where focus is set very clearly). And mirrorless cameras come with a much larger variety of body types and sensor sizes. The main advantage to mirrorless is a smaller/lighter internally less-complex camera. But the systems being newer, they have fewer lenses and less 3rd-party support. The three main systems to look at here are Sony E-mount, Fuji X, and micro four-thirds (which is done by both Olympus and Panasonic).

Which one you want to use is a personal decision. Some folks (like me) shoot both. I lug the Canon bag when I'm "serious". Typically for birding and landscape shooting, but also for doing lit portraits. My micro four-thirds bag, however, is what I take to Comic-Con. Because the Canon bag is 25-30 lbs. My mft bag is 5 lbs. And I can still pretty much shoot all the same stuff. And if I'm going light, I'm hauling my Fuji X100T.

Fixed Lens Cameras

If you can't afford to buy a camera system, then a fixed-lens camera is going to be a lot easier on your wallet. Obviously, you lose the versatility of swapping lenses on your camera, so what lens and sensor comes with the camera become your main focus. My X100T has an ASP-C sized sensor in it, just like a Canon 7DMkII does. However, the fixed lens is much more limited than most. It's a 23mm f/2 lens. It doesn't zoom. It's very sharp, pretty fast (large maximum aperture), and a little wide. I can't shoot everything with it. But I learned photography with a fixed lens, so I'm used to the limitations. It cost me $1100. But aside from some cards and batteries, that's pretty much all I've had to spend. My Canon system is probably well past $5k at this point. My micro four-thirds well over the $2k mark.

Sensor Size

The X100T is kind of an eccentric anomaly among cameras, tho. There are other fixed lens cameras that are quite a bit more versatile, and not as expensive. These seem, at this time, to be centering around 1"-format sensors. dSLRs and mirrorless cameras mostly use three formats: full frame (1x crop; same size as a frame of 35mm film); APS-C (1.5x/1.6x crop; roughly the same size as a frame of APS film); and four-thirds (aka 4/3" format, 2x crop factor). A 1"-format sensor has a 3x crop factor.



The larger the sensor, the better the image quality (resolution, noise performance, and dynamic range) is perceived to be, but what's sufficient for you may not actually have to be that big. Sensor technology's come a long long way in even just the last three years. You can see this progression even in phone cameras. Even smaller sensors can do pretty high ISO settings with higher resolution than the first generation of dSLRs. My first Canon back in 2005 was 8MP. Today, my iPhone 5S delivers 8MP.

1"-format Enthusiast Compacts

1"-format is a "sweet spot", where the sensor is small enough that you can design small compact superzoom lenses and get decent macro performance. But still large enough to deliver clearly better image quality than, say, a phone camera sensor. And a lot of camera companies are playing around with what constitutes a good camera with this sensor in it across a range of price points. Canon has the G# X series (G3 X, G5 X, G7 X, and G9 X); Sony was the first out of the gate with the RX100 (currently Mk IV, iirc), Panasonic has the new LX10 and FZxxxx series (latest: FZ2500). There are also some models with 4/3" sensors (Canon G1 X, and Panasonic LX100). Theses cameras have zoom lenses, typically pretty fast. And some of them (G9 X, FZxxxx) have superzoom lenses. These can still get very expensive ($700-$1000) range, but again, that's all you're going to spend. And some of the models (G1 X, FZxxxx, RX100) have older models you can find used. For example, I've seen used listings for the Mk I of the G1 X going for around $350.

These might be a better bet than, say, a 1/2.3"-format bridge camera, which looks kind of dSLR-ish, but has a very slow fixed superzoom lens, and a very small sensor, so that while it has a lot of framing versatility and macro capability, it won't do well handheld in low light.

I should also add a small note to echo Richard's statement above... the BEST money you can spend on photography at the beginning is probably going to be on a book/class/video tutorial/workshop or whatever so you can get the basics into your noggin. I tend to recommend Bryan Peterson's Learning to See Creatively and just starting with whatever camera you now have, and seeing what frustrations you run into. Those frustrations should guide you to camera features you want and are willing to pay for.

[William W]

Donald considered reply #4 top drawer. I agree. But reply #12 exceed it. Go Kathy... !

[William W]

. . . I was told by two different people that these are the cameras I should consider.

Curious - salespeople or friends who are Photographers? If the latter - what were their reasons?

*

. . . I am pretty good at photo retouching and design . . . I always find myself helping friends and others retouch/fix their pictures that other photographers take.

Curious - "retouching" in the classic or traditional meaning, i,e, with brush and ink applied to the print
or meaning "digital post processing" using a computer and working on a digital file?

WW

[rpcrowe]

One final comment:

I would not consider a camera that did not have an eye level viewfinder. I think using an LCD as viewfinder is quite awkward and inefficient. I personally prefer through the lens viewfinders rather than electronic viewfinders. However, the deciding factor would be that the camera have some type of built-in eye level viewfinder...

Another final comment:

There is a point of diminishing return when you down size your camera. Very small cameras are light enough to be held with two or three fingers, like this fellow I captured in Shanghai...



The two or three finger grip is certainly not a steady hold for any camera. Even biting one's lip will not steady the camera

[William W]

Adding to this one particular point which Kathy made: “Actually, it's time to figure out what type of camera you need to look at. I think diving immediately to Canon dSLRs models and lenses may be a bit soon at your stage of decision-making.”

I agree 100% with that view.

Hence - firstly, for absolute clarity of the precise meaning of my previous Post #5 –
Post #5 was addressing the specific question regarding as to whether Mary should buy a 7DMkII or a 6D and it was implicit that these were the only two options that she was considering.

Secondly, as my general advice now, after Mary thinks through and chooses exactly what type of camera system that she requires - I do NOT think that it is the best idea simply to default, without thinking about it and just go out and buy a “beginner’s” camera.

A camera and lenses are only tools. Fundamentally and generally speaking the more you pay for a camera body and the more you pay for any one class of lens, then the more complex and better quality will be those tools.

For any adult with a reasonably keen mind and patience, who has made a solid choice to buy a particular tool to learn and to use - I think that there is not any reason to NOT buy high-end, high-priced, highly capable tools for their basic learning. In fact, there is a logical argument that buying top end tools is, in the long term better value for money and also less limiting to learning and exploring the nuances of any Skill or Craft.

WW

[Donald]

For any adult with a reasonably keen mind and patience, who has made a solid choice to buy a particular tool to learn and to use - I think that there is not any reason to NOT buy high-end, high-priced, highly capable tools for their basic learning. In fact, there is a logical argument that buying top end tools is, in the long term better value for money and also less limiting to learning and exploring the nuances of any Skill or Craft.

I would completely endorse this view. If someone is entering photography and KNOWS that they are totally committed to learning and to achieving the highest standards they possible can, then go in at as high a level as budget will allow. Yes, at first there will be so much that you will wonder whether you need all these functions and options. But if you are determined, then you will grow into them.

I am having the privilege, at the moment, of being in Yosemite National Park. I have had many wonderful conversations with so many genuinely nice people. A few days a go I was in conversation with a gentleman with a fairly high end Nikon round his neck. we were speaking about photography and, in particular about light. I made reference to shooting RAW, particularly in this sort of setting and given the subject matter. He asked, 'What's RAW?' I changed the conversation.

[Manfred M]

For any adult with a reasonably keen mind and patience, who has made a solid choice to buy a particular tool to learn and to use - I think that there is not any reason to NOT buy high-end, high-priced, highly capable tools for their basic learning. In fact, there is a logical argument that buying top end tools is, in the long term better value for money and also less limiting to learning and exploring the nuances of any Skill or Craft.

Bill - one could make that argument, but let me jump over to an analogy. Would you put a beginner behind the wheel of a supercar (Ferrari, Maserati, etc) when they first start driving? It might be fun, but I suspect that something "simpler" would probably make a better learning tool.

I've also had someone come to me with a high end camera and asked me if it was working properly, because the image quality was worse than what they were getting from their iPhone. Not surprisingly, the camera worked properly, but it was well over the user's head. Someone had told them that they should shoot in manual mode as this would be the best way to learn. The images from the iPhone were a lot better...

[William W]

Bill - one could make that argument, but let me jump over to an analogy. Would you put a beginner behind the wheel of a supercar (Ferrari, Maserati, etc) when they first start driving? It might be fun, but I suspect that something "simpler" would probably make a better learning tool.

I've also had someone come to me with a high end camera and asked me if it was working properly, because the image quality was worse than what they were getting from their iPhone. Not surprisingly, the camera worked properly, but it was well over the user's head. Someone had told them that they should shoot in manual mode as this would be the best way to learn. The images from the iPhone were a lot better...

I have had this exact conversation before: exactly the same analogy.

Firstly to answer your question: NO. I would not put a learner / beginner behind the wheel of a Ferrari, Maserati etc. I have taught three, perhaps four people to drive from scratch. i.e. total novices (tautology purposeful). I purposely chose a mid powered, manual sedan (i.e. “stick shift” - those old fashioned cars with THREE pedals).

However I argue vigorously that the car/camera analogy is flawed.

Firstly flawed because the instructor cannot "dumb down" the nuance of touch required to control the clutch of an (earlier model) Lamborghini or Porsche - nor can the instructor easily put a governor on the power or torque of their engines. (two examples only – chosen those cars because I have driven those cars), whereas it is quiet easy to "dumb down" an high end DSLR - or any high end camera (it is assumed that we are excluding non mainstream cameras).

So I argue that to compare the example that you gave about the person with the high end camera is non sequitur: it would only have required a little hand's on guidance by an instructor (you mentioned all the instruction which was provided was "shoot in manual mode as this would be the best way to learn." alternatively (as just one example) the high end camera could easily have been 'dumbed-down' by the instructor setting the capture to JPEG only, the metering to the equivalent of "Matrix" (in Nikon speak) normalizing all the in camera JPEG processing and setting the Camera Mode to P (Program) and showing the operator how to read (and adjust) the Aperture and the Shutter Speed and how to set the ISO: explaining that 'high ISO is for dark scene and "low ISO" is for bright scene and then encouraging the operator that they cannot easily break the camera if they stuff up (one the other hand it is relatively easy to stuff up a Lamborghini's transmission) . . . and set them free to make photos and investigate what big and little apertures do and what fast and slow shutter speeds do . . .
So here we have an argument about the instruction given (actually instruction that was not given but could have been given) – this stands apart and quite separate from the analogy of comparing two types of high end equipment.

The same logic would apply to something you know a lot about and at which I am a novice – sea/ocean diving. I am a reasonable swimmer. I have snorkelled, maybe down to 10~12ft. But if I came to you and said ‘Hey Manfred I have just bought $8,000 of Suba-gear, let’s go for a dive to look at that wreck +100ft down - (I hope) - you’d handcuff me and talk a great deal of sense into me and point me towards where I could get good instruction, if you could provide it. This analogy of Suba diving and the tools for it is non-sequitre to the argument of camera’s as tools on which to learn

Also I argue that the analogy is non sequitur on a second issue: - equally with the same limited instruction of "shoot in manual mode as this would be the best way to learn." - a novice might be in all sorts of bother with the cheapest of "beginner's" cameras, just the same as the person who sought your advice was, with their high-end camera.

WW

[DanK]

I agree with Bill that it isn't harder to learn on an expensive camera than on a cheap one, but nonetheless, I I think there are some strong arguments for NOT starting with such an expensive camera. The first is one of Kathy's. Unless you have a big budget for this, Mary, you need to take into account the cost of the entire package. the three uses you list suggest different equipment, and buying it all will cost a bundle. A decent tripod and head for lansdscape work, for example, will set you back a bit, and for candids of kids, you will almost certainly want a flash. And you will want more than one lens. And you will need software. You may need to upgrade your computer. The second reason is that you can't know yet what YOU will most want when you have some experience. Several posters have noted that the two cameras you list are very different in their strengths and weaknesses. Once you have some experience under your belt, you will have a better idea what kind of more expensive camera body (if any) is worth it for YOU. In the meantime, I would buy an inexpensive body and use it to study and practice, practice, practice.