The great travel. Should I upgrade from 5D?

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by iguanaluke, Oct 14, 2017.

  1. Dear photo.net,

    this is my first post here although I’ve been reading the fora for a long time and always appreciated the friendly tone of discussions and helpful comments. So here’s my question and it’s one I admit I’m ashamed to ask, since the question is: Which dslr should I buy? Yeah, I know. The bigger issue is: I used to shoot a lot, portraits and street photo mostly, but these days are gone and I can’t see them coming back. So it’s gonna be a dslr for an occasional, holiday shooter. I own a 5d mark I, the shutter count is about 25k (I’m not a quick fire shooter). I also have some lenses, but apart from the 85mm/1.8 I’m not really attached to them. So now a three week trip to Argentina looms (I live in Poland), and I’m thinking: my camera is more than 10 years old, maybe I should buy a new one for the upcoming journey? I’m looking at 6d mark I or the Nikon 750d, I see their merits (especially the Nikon’s), but it’s hard to find a used body with less than 20k actuations for a good price. But is the whole thinking right? Will there be enough difference in image quality to be worth the hustle? In low light I’m sure there will be but otherwise? Is the shooting experience any better? Or should I rather pursuit a decent 24-70L lens instead? (Until now, I mostly used primes.) Yes - I know about the mirrorless, I even owned a XP Pro, but the build, the slow AF, the shooting experience just didn’t feel right. I guess I need to look through the lens. So which way would you go?

    Thanks.

    Lukasz
     
  2. Depends on you, and your physical condition.
    I am a long time past college age, and cannot easily carry the weight that I used to.
    What I found in long trips is that the camera bag will feel heavier the longer the trip. So that 10 pound camera bag may/will feel like 20 pounds after 3 weeks.

    In my case, I went with a Nikon DX body, rather than the FX body, for one reason...WEIGHT.
    A FX D750 + 24-120 is 30% heavier than the DX D7200 + 18-140.
    So I went with the D7200.

    But then I found myself grabbing the small P&S rather than the dslr. Weight and bulk again.
    But the P&S has been frustrating to use. It's only plus is the small size and light weight. For me, shutter lag is it's biggest problem.
    The D7200 + 18-140 is 40% heavier than the D3400 + 18-55.
    So I probably will get a D3400 as a "tweener" camera, when I don't want to carry the weight of the D7200, but want better camera control than the P&S gives me.

    So in your case, maybe the crop sensor EOS T7i might be a similar lighter alternative to a full frame camera.
     
  3. Thanks Gary for pointing that out. You're right that the camera bag gains weight as the trip progresses. I once took the 5D and a film body to Turkey and how I regretted that! But my question is: is the potential image quality of a newer camera so much better than the 12 year old 5D? I tend to think that it's better to get a good adventure zoom than invest in pixels. The tempting thing is the high iso though. But then - maybe I'm missing something.
     
  4. Yes. 12 years is a long time for a body. Sensor technology has increased a lot during that time.
    The upgrade from my D70 (2005), to the D7200 (2016) was a HUGE increase in functionality and image.
    For me the high ISO went from 1600 to 25600, a 4 stop increase in sensor sensitivity. So I no longer fear the dark, and that opened up more photo opportunities.
    Sensor size went from 6MP in the D70 to 24MP in the D7200, not that I ever really pushed 6MP. The extra sensor resolution now means that I can do more cropping in the computer, and I don't have to shoot so tight. Though I was used to shooting tight and cropping in the camera, from shooting slides.

    With my D7200, I got the 18-140 zoom. Not pro quality, but it saves on carrying multiple lenses, like I used to carry. And that 1 lens is lighter and less bulky than the 4 lenses that I used to carry. With film, on a long trip, I carried a Nikon F2 camera + 4 lenses (24/2.8mm + 43-86/3.5mm + 80-200/4.5 + 105/2.5). The 105 was simply to have a faster lens than my 4.5 long zoom. Now, I just carry the 18-140, and I have almost the coverage of the 4 lenses that I used to carry. The 18mm end is not as wide as the 24mm on a film camera. And I did like the extra coverage of the 24 over a 28. So I may get a wider lens, as a 2nd lens.

    I would at least consider the crop sensor EOS T7i + 18-135mm, as a lighter alternative to a full-frame camera.
    You can use the heavier primes and zooms at home, where you don't have to haul the gear around for 3 weeks.
     
  5. You take 2500-clicks a year, so I'd say stop trying to buy a body with under 25000-clicks. You'll get a much better deal as you near 100,000-clicks and you'll never approach the expected life of the shutter. Stick with Canon, not because it's better than Nikon, but because you've got a lens that you love and there's no good reason to move. A 6D would be a major step forward in dynamic range. What more do you need?
     
  6. I am no math genius but:
    • You state your wild days are over.
    • SLR shutters are build to last 100k clicks among paranoid pessimists. - Get a camera with 75k clicks; at your pace it will be horribly outdated when it reaches the 100k and might still go on to 150 or beyond.
    If the 6D is somewhat appealing to you, get one with a 24-105mm for about 1000 Euro? - Yes you wrote 24-70 but the f2.8 L lacks IS and is too short as a single all day long lens for my taste. - I recently switched from 18-50/55 kit zooms to a Sigma 18-70 that came with an used (k-mount crop) body and love(!) the extra reach. Getting hold of a D750 with 24-120, I'd happily take off for a trip without further lens shopping or packing.
    I haven't used an old 5D yet. I wouldn't expect an altered daylight shooting experience from the 6D which came with roughly the same AF unit but maybe a missing button somewhere? When somebody tossed me a Nikon in the past, I was usually impressed by the AF speed. But I am saying that coming from the crappy Fuji and mainly Pentax / Samsung realm ( I am new to Canon). I am absolutely not getting along with Nikon menus, but that issue could be fixed, if I took 2 hours with manual &/ online tutorials to prep.
    To my limited understanding a D750 should work well for somebody who figures out how to dial in exposure compensation or how to enter manual mode (which includes leaving auto-ISO!). Tossed to me (or grandma in law) it will produce somewhat nice JPEGs, almost on a Fuji level. (<- I hope you agree that our old Fuji buggers did at least that pretty well). A vexing aspect about the D750: Nikon's live view AF is horribly sluggish and frustrating. A co-traveler cursed his noisily during a recent vacation. Shot like an SLR it should provide an enjoyable multitude of AF spots. Really nice to have, compared to "a center spot and a bit of fishy crap around it" as seen in older models. - Clarifying: A fast and reliable de facto center spot only AF can take great pictures and is nice to have.
    Upon the image quality issue: I guess I sense where you are coming from. - My Leica M8 is probably in a similar range as your 5D (and an f-stop below it) It takes nice pictures in enough light, when I happen to get things right... Getting deeper into the low light realm was great for me. - I read reviews according to which my old 18MP Monochrom is comparable to a 5D Mk II. Biggest flaw of my Leica stuff is the long end of the lens line; 90 & 135mm. - Glass is decent but hard to focus and wastes light for extra DOF "just in case". That was my reason to get an additional 5D IV with 70-200/2.8. The Nikon counterpart was out of question for me. Canon's lens seems more bang for the buck and my admittedly limited quick Nikon impression told clearly "Canon must be the brand to get!" Things will of course look different when you shop for a different focal length...
    I think online resources like DxOmark are somewhat helpful in figuring out if you should upgrade. - If they tested the lenses you own, you can look at he perceptual megapixel column for the current and the next camera, to get an idea what a more modern body might mean, at the end of the day. - Their rating might be unscientific biased etc. but I hope it is at least a rough gauge that we have at hand. I wouldn't overrate their camera ratings. If they tell a trend as in 6D vs 5D; fine. - If they seem to suggest a system change: Be reluctant. - Maybe DxO haven't honed their skills to compare apples and oranges well enough? Maybe your less beloved unspectacular lenses are still a reason to stick with Canon? - How do you rate owning a backup body you are familiar with for serious jobs at home? Mixing systems sucks in it's own way and tends to mean extra weight, extra cost and double purchases.
    Among occasionally lazy travelers: Primes aren't always the right way to go. With just one body they are likely to mean a lot of dirt on your sensor and for a landscape picture I'd rather sacrifice sharpness from an imagined tripod for IS and DOF that let me take the shot hand held.
    I have no clue how long zooms will last. Maybe you have a chance to buy an used one in broad daylight next to a brick wall with your laptop at hand to check it? Best of luck!
     
  7. I have 6D and 24-70/2.8, it is mine go kit along with 70-300 if I want be ready for everything and get quality shots. But it is heavy, if i want go light i use Sony 7.
    I think 5D1 bit too old.
     
  8. And in my opinion IS or VR so overrated, it doesn't stop subject movement and create weird looking backgrounds.
     
  9. Agree with the others, forget your <20K requirement. I'd get a 6D ver 1 myself and you can continue to use your Canon lenses. Yes, the image quality is that much better. If you want to start all over again, then I'd check out the competition.
     
  10. The 6D would be a good choice and keep using the Canon lenses, of course, the Nikon D750 would be nice too, but then add Nikon lenses to your cost. You did not specify your budget. If you are going to switch camps, there is also the Sony A7R ii and with a Metabones adapter, you could still use your Canon lenses. The body is smaller too, so it would be less bulk to carry around, probably the best sensor of the three cameras and is 42 megapixels.
     
  11. What's wrong with a 5D? It may be a bit old but if it's still working I see no reason to replace it, unless you want something that it can't do. Always think about a 2nd body, just in case #1 fails. BTW, was the mirror in your 5D replaced? If not that would be reason for me to think of a replacement.
    I'm still happy with my 5D, if I'd go on a major trip I'd consider a 6D and take the 5D as backup. Or use the 5D along a 80D.
     
  12. Yeah, I guess the low click requirement doesn't make that much sense with my usage. On the other hand, it's not only clicks but the overall wear that can be gauged by that number. That's why I was aiming at a body relatively unused. Thanks Josvan for the words of restraint, too. (Yes, the mirror was replaced.) I am not a guy to jump to all the newest gear, the next-great-thing, and so on. I am perfectly happy driving a car that is 17 years old, since it ideally delivers me from one place to the other. That's why I was so interested if the image quality from the 6D was indeed so much better. All of you assure me that it is, so I may take a shot (figuratively and literally). The weight of the A7R is tempting, but I just can't imagine working without an ovf. I tried the electronic viewfinder in XPro1 and hated it. Thanks to everyone for their input. Have a great weekend.
     
  13. The 1st generation of Fujis came with indeed horrible EVFs. - Trustworthy folks on this board convinced me that anything Sony A7(&9) series should be better. If the camera tempts you, take the chance to try it out, preferably indoors, with a friend willing to move towards you for a few times. To me it is the low EVF refresh rate that makes the X-E1 no joy to use, while I'd be most likely fine to stare at pixels. - YMMV.
     
  14. The 6D's IQ is vastly better if you are shooting in low enough light that you would benefit from anything higher than ISO 3200. Even @ f2.0, at 85mm, that covers a LOT of ground... especially if travelling in unfamiliar territory (w/ questionable lighting)... if that enables you to bump (for example) the ss from 1/60 to 1/100 w/ an ISO bump from 3200 -> 6400, I can virtually guarantee that (if hanheld) the result will be better.

    IDK though... If it's a once in a blue-moon type trip, I'd seriously consider upgrading the body for it... If your only option currently is the 85/1.8, there is a lot of cheap modern prime glass out there that will blow you away...
     
  15. I just picked up a 5d for a great price on ebay, I know it may be old in Digital terms but I just went out today and took
    a few fall tree pictures and they look terrific. Keep in mine I do have a Fuji XPRO-1 which i love and use all the time,
    I just wanted a Full frame camera to fill that void.
     
    dcstep likes this.
  16. Do a little testing to see how image quality compares between your two bodies. I'm curious to know.
     
  17. Did some shooting today and the quality with the 5D is really nice, and it's full frame so the bokeh is great!
     
  18. I currently shoot with a 5D IV but still have my Canon 30D and 5d II. I even still have a 20 10+ old film based Canon 7NE. I can still do great work with any of them. Spend the money on better glass. I use L-series primes 85 1.2L, a couple on Canon L-series zooms 70-200 F2.8 IS II, 17-40 F4L and love the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC. When I bounce these lenses between the older cameras and look at the pics in Lightroom, I really can't tell the differences in camera's as much as the differences in lens used. the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC and Canon 17-40 F4L are great light weight travel lenses. Another stellar lens for the money and weight is the Tamron 70-300 F4-5.6 VC. It's like $399 but compares in quality to my 70-200 L. Not nearly as fast in focusing but it's not for sports for travel it is way lighter and I don't care so much if it gets damaged.

    Personally, I travel with my 5D2 and older lenses. I don't use my 5DIV unless it is for paid work. Tooo much to worry about when people look it makes me nervous.
     
    peter_c|5 likes this.

Share This Page