murtyjr Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>I currently own a Canon 60D with 18-135MM lens. I am planning to upgrade to 6D. Will I gain anything from this upgrade and if so what lens should I purchase.<br> Thanks</p> <p>Ash</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>You'll gain another camera. What else are you trying to achieve? Why are you planning to "upgrade"?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murtyjr Posted January 22, 2015 Author Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>Thanks for your opinion. I want to take advantage of the full frame feature and use of the professional lens. See if you can help me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>You can use professional (L) lenses on the 60D already, no problem, but your 18-135mm will not fit on the 6D. The 6D will give you improved image quality, dynamic range and less noisy images at high ISO's, and the viewfinder will present a larger image. I am not sure you will gain much else to be honest (I'm not intimately familiar with the 60D specifications). The 6D is bigger, but not all that much bigger than the 60D. You might want to think about whether buying a 17-55 f2.8 EFS IS lens would not be a better option. This is a "professional" lens designed for the APS-C size, or you could get the Tamron 17-50 or the Sigma equivalent: any of which would improve your image quality. Many people like the 15-85mm EFS Canon lens - which again will produce nicer images than the 18-135mm. If I were you, I would not be overly drawn to full frame. Another thought would be to upgrade to a 7D mkII - it is much better than the 6D in AF capabilities and probably a pretty close match IQ-wise too (although the 6D will be better), and it has a very high frame rate (10 fps), whereas the 6D is slow in comparison (4.5).</p> Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murtyjr Posted January 22, 2015 Author Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>Robin<br> Thanks for your opinion. If I decide to keep my 60D but would like to add some L series lens, can you recommend different brand L series lens. </p> <p>Ash</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_r.1 Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>Another thing to consider is what type of photography you do. For wildlife, birds and sports, the 1.6 crop factor of your 60D comes in handy.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Katz Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 There is no other brand of "L" lenses besides Canon "L" lenses. While I agree with Robin's recommendations, If you want a Canon "L" lens for your 60D, I would recommend the Canon 70-200 F4L IS or 70-300L IS. I would find the 24-70L lenses are not wide enough for me on a 60D . The Canon 10-22 EFS would provide a significantly different prospective and I would not care that its not an "L" lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Keefer Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>You will take wider photos with the same lens, so you gain more photo area from the same lens. You will not be able to use any APS-C lenses on your full frame Canon camera. But any of the lenses you have that are full frame lenses will simply take wider angle photos. You will also gain really good low light capability with the 6D. I notice a difference from my 7D and 40D in regards to images taken in very low light. I am very pleased with my Canon 6D.</p> <p>Here is an example showing how much more photo you gain from the same lens between an APS-C and a Full Frame Canon. Hope this helps.</p> <p> </p><div></div> Cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Keefer Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>What lenses to get, depends on what you want to do, they all have their purposes.<br> My Canon 17-40mm f/4 L is nice for wide angle stuff. Very sharp, good for landscape, group shots will have some distortion towards the edges at 17mm. It can be a cool effect if that is what you are going for.<br> My 50mm f/1.4 is really nice for low light and small group shots and you can do portraits, but not a perfect portrait lens, you will still notice a little distortion if you are close to your subject, but still an awesome lens.<br> My 24-70 f/2.8 L is a great all around lens, I love it for wedding stuff, on a full frame camera at 24mm you can get some good landscape wide angle shots and still quickly zoom to 70mm to pull off a close up portrait. It is a good walking around lens and at f/2.8 still pretty fast and given the 6D great high ISO and low light low noise, this lens is a pleasure to have.</p> <p>My Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 is another good wedding lens, good for portraits and small group shots, at f/2.8 it is fast enough in low light and when combined with the 6D it's nice, good for portraits and close ups. While not the perfect outdoor wildlife shooting camera, it can be used for some nice shots at a sporting event. But you might want something with some more reach for birding or to get you into the action at the big game with any real resolution.</p> <p>My Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS is nice for outdoor wild life shooting, not a fast lens, but for daylight work it's pretty good. Even this lens is just getting into the birding range and there are times I long for more reach, something around 800mm.</p> <p>There are a lot more choices out there, I can only comment on my lenses and what I use them for.</p> Cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murtyjr Posted January 22, 2015 Author Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>Having read all the good comments, now I want to stay with my current Canon 60D. Off late I have been involved in taking photos of a religious place and the photos are taken in low light condition. PLEASE RECOMMEND ME LENS FOR LOW LIGHT CONDITION. Currently I have Canon 18-135 and Tokina 11-16 F2.8 in my inventory. Besides, Canon can I have suggestions of other manufacturers WHO OFFER SAME FEATURES AS CANON.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Keefer Posted January 22, 2015 Share Posted January 22, 2015 <p>For low light you will want something fast, your Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 should be doing a pretty good job. There is the Canon 50mm f/1.8 that is rather affordable $100-$150. The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L if you can find a used version 1 you may find it for around $800-$900, the new version 2 runs around $1900 and has some IQ improvement over the original version 1, Canon changed the design and coatings on the lens to improve chromatic aberration on the version 2, but I didn't feel it was enough to warrant double the price. The version 1 has always been an excellent lens..</p> <p>I have a SIGMA 50mm f/1.4 and it is a great lens. I am sure others here will have some good suggestions too.</p> Cheers, Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_tuften Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>I use the 50mm 1.8, 35mm 2 (not the IS version), both produce good images. Tele have a 85 1.8 and the ef 70-200 f4 L is pretty good, cheapest L lens, you may want t with IS. When I bought my copy Is was not invented. The primes will let you go low light, and the bokeh (out of focus blur) on the 85 f1.8 is great, helps to isolate your subject. Oh, and get a good tripod for the low light stuff. The 85 is good outdoors, will the 35 is a great cheap all round prime. You could sub the 50 1.4 for the 50 1.8 if you wanted.<br /><br />Normal zooms: There is the efs 17-55, or alternatives sigma 17-50 OS or the Tamron 17-50 I have. If you want need macro the ef 100 2.8 is pretty good, I use this it is sharp. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neill_farmer2 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>It all starts with your budget. The lowest cost would be a Tamron 17-50 2.8 lens, there are two, non IS and IS. If your religious places photography involves interior shots the IS version, not quite as sharp, may be better. If a tripod is used then any lens, 17- xx, stopped down to f5.6 - f8 will do. Sharpness will depend on how much you pay.<br> Next step up would be a 6D with a 24-105 f4L. This will offer better image quality over the 60D and this will become greater as the ISO is increased. The 6D camera is capable of giving good images at ISO3200 and ISO6400 and above.<br> In good light or with a tripod at ISOs below 800 the differences in image quality between a 60D and a 6D will be less but still visible. To some extent these difference can be negated further in Post Production.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wouter Willemse Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 would be another consideration maybe, BUT: low light isn't necessarily solved with a wider aperture, or a camera with better high ISO results.<br> A lot of low light photography looks drab and featureless because it's not so much low light, but featureless, diffuse bland light. No camera and no lens can make anything out of that. To get decent photos in low light, the light still needs to be decent quality throwing a decent level of contrast. If you could show some examples of photos you are unhappy with, it would be easier to indicate whether or not it's actually feasible.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>[[PLEASE RECOMMEND ME LENS FOR LOW LIGHT CONDITION.]]</p> <p>I recommend a tripod. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igord Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>6D plus 28/1.8 and 85/1.8 for low light photograhy is all you need.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnsie Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>I have a 60D and often shoot indoor church scenes or night shots, that require low light capability, as you are suggesting. These days, I usually use my Canon 17-55 2.8 zoom lens, although I used to use prime lenses at 1.8 aperture (28, 50, 85, etc.) But I find these days it is easier to just walk around with my 17-55. </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobatkins Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>"<em>I want to take advantage of the full frame feature and use of the professional lens"</em></p> <p>Do you need either? Are you going to be making 20x30 (or larger) exhibition prints? There's really no such thing as a "professional lens". Some non-L primes are as good as or better than L zooms. Full frame, in itself, has few advantages other than somewhat higher quality when you're making really large prints or when you need the full wideangle view of EF lenses.</p> <p>For very low light work I would go with a 6D, which gives the least noise at high ISO settings, plus a fast prime like the 35/1.4, 50/1.4 or 85/1.4, plus a tripod. If not the f1.4 lenses, then the f2 or f1.8 lenses (which are considerably cheaper).</p> <p>Any tripod at all is better than no tripod. If no tripod, then a monopod.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcstep Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 <p>Whether shooting full-frame or crop-sensor, when using wide to medium zooms you need to use Digital Lens Optimization to correct for geometric distortions, particularly at the long end. Canon's Digital Photo Professional includes DLO and so do some other Raw conversion programs, such as Lightroom and DxO Optics Pro.</p> <p>DLO not only corrects for geometric distortions, but also corrects chromatic aberration, vignetting, and other errors at each focal length and each aperture.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angkordave Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 <p>The best fast zoom lens out there for APS Cameras is the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 Its a game changer and the fastest zoom lens on the market. It give FF quality in sharpness and Bokeh = to a 24-70 F2.8. I have made a comparison test with 70D and 5D Mk2 with the new Canon 24-70L . Not only is its the sharpest zoom I've ever owned the build quality and finish = the best Pro lenses I've eve used. At $800 its a bargain. It will also work with limitations as a 35mm F1.8 on FF. Ive used it in dark conditions where the vignetting does not matter<br />If you want to go really wide on APS Sigmas 8-16 and 10-20 work really well.<br /> If you decide on FF I can say from experience with my 6D that the low light perfomance is remarkable. I have used it with a Canon and Sigma 50mm F1.4s up to 25000 ISO with bit of noise but still impressive.The Sigma is in my opinion much better build. the canon 50mm was rubbish for unreliability and only average for contrast wide open. <br> .</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 <blockquote> <p> the canon 50mm was rubbish for unreliability</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> Can you provide some data on this?</p> Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 <blockquote> <p>t. It give FF quality in sharpness and Bokeh = to a 24-70 F2.8.</p> </blockquote> <p>Except it is 29-56 equivalent, not 24-70mm. Which Canon 50mm are you referring to that is "rubbish"? I have had the Canon 50 1.4 for 6 years with zero problems. I think it is a good lens.</p> Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_pierlot Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 <blockquote> <p>the canon 50mm was rubbish for unreliability</p> </blockquote> <p><br /> I got my 50/1.4 way back when I first adopted the EOS system, and have had no issues with it. Perhaps its reputation for unreliability is the result the "internet effect." People tend to complain loudly online when their gear gives them problems, but are less inclined to praise their gear when it's working well. I bet there are many, many more people who are satisfied with their 50/1.4's than are not.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony_r.1 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 <blockquote> <p>the canon 50mm was rubbish for unreliability</p> </blockquote> <p>I've had the 50mm f/1.8, the original metal mount one, for over 20 years. Still going strong with never a problem.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_z Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Hi. 1. Just I'm not sure yet if it's possible to take sharp photos by 6d with 24-105 mm, high dynamic range and pro sharpness like Nikon full frame! 2. since AF system isn't like 70d, how manually is possible to take good video? 3. What can I do for controlling voice during videography, since there is no headphone jack?! Regards to all professional Canon shooters :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now