Trade in 5D original and 70-200 2.8L toward 6D body?

[gregory_imler]

<p>Hello! I'm thinking about upgrading some equipment and was hoping to get some opinions from the group. I currently have a 5D body with a 70-200 2.8L (the oldest model without IS), and I'm thinking about trading that whole setup in toward a new 6D body and pairing that with my 85 1.8. The 5D has served me well, but it's limitations, like its inability to shoot tethered into Lightroom and the display, are starting to become irritations. <br>

Thanks!</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Got to say I wouldn't recommend getting rid of a 70-200mm and replacing it with an 85mm, or rather I would think very carefully about it. You will only want it back soon after. On the other hand, I sense you are short of the $ necessary to just buy a 6D outright. It's a difficult choice. If you have other lenses such as a 24/28/35 or 50mm, then I suppose you could replace the 70-200mm with the 85mm and then when you are ready buy it again, or, better still, get the 70-200mm f4 IS which is about the same price as a 70-200mm f2.8 non-IS.</p>

[gregory_imler]

<p>Thanks Robin, yeah, don't have a lot of disposable income to outright upgrade and have loved the 70-200. My main body is a 5DmkII and I have a 50mm, the 40mm and a 24-70 on that ... as well as the 85, which I actually do like a lot. </p>

[colin carron]

<p>I recently sold my 5DII for a 6D. For me the issues were the better ISO range of the 6D along with a quieter shutter (and even quieter mode), and slightly smaller size and weight. The 6D shutter is rated for a shorter lifetime but I can't see that being a problem for me. I am very happy with the change.<br /> I sold the 5DII body on ebay at a price which nearly covered the new price of the 6D. I suggest you sell at auction rather than trade in at a shop as the trade in value will be a fair bit less than an auction price.</p>

[gregory_imler]

<p>Thanks, Colin. Yeah, the auction route would probably yield a better price than a trade in; a local shop near me gives higher values on the gear if you use the trade-in toward gear in their inventory ... something I'm sure a lot of stores do. They've told me that they're very interested in the 70-200 and the 5D body as they don't have a lot of good used inventory at the moment (the whole setup is in excellent+ condition), so thinking of going in and negotiating as they've said they want the used items and it'll take one 6D body off their hands while they still have others in their inventory.</p>

[wgpinc]

<p>A local store will probably overprice the 6D. Here's an 'open box' 6D at Adorama for $1269. http://www.adorama.com/ICA6DOB.html<br /> Don't sell your 70-200mm. You'll regret it every time you 'reach' for it. <br /> Here's a Canon refurbished 6D for $999. http://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/eos-6d-body-refurbished<br /> I use the 6D, recently, shot a wedding for friends with it. They were knocked out with the pictures. It has fantastic quality. When I got mine I sold my 5D II because the 6D was better in almost every way. Good luck!</p>

[gregory_imler]

<p>Thanks, Gil! That's the problem ha! The 70-200 is great, but then I hear that the 6D is fantastic too. So the choice I'm weighing is trade in the 70-200 toward a great body and pair that with my 85, which I do love and will require being more mobile (and won't have the same great compression as racking out all the way to 200), or stay with the great lens but deal with the annoyances of a body like the 5D, ie, the screen, lack of tethering support for Lightroom & lower resolution.</p>

[orly_andico]

<p>Well.... I have a 6D. Then I bought a 5D (original) for $300-ish just to have a second body I could mod without fear (put in a split-screen viewfinder).<br>

I'm not a professional or anything, and tethering is not a use case I have. So given my usage, the 5D isn't significantly worse than the 6D. Yes the ISO could be better - but I used a 40D for many many years, so I'm used to bad high-ISO performance. The screen is bad (worse than the 40D) but it's not killing me. The interface is slow, etc. etc. but all things that can be lived with.<br>

etc. etc. I could live with a 5D. It should be alarming to Canon than a 10+ year old camera is still this usable.<br>

Again someone who counts on their images for their livelihood etc. could find much to recommend the 6D. But me, I wouldn't give up a 5D + 70-200 for a 6D + 85.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I have had a 5DII since it's release, and have been very happy with it in all respects except perhaps with its low ISO dynamic range (which is reportedly an issue with all Canon DSLR's). So I haven't been tempted to upgrade to the 5DIII, 6D, or even to the 5DS/R. But if I needed a body with better high ISO performance, I would be tempted.</p>

<p>As for the lens, I agree with Robin that you'll miss the 70-200 if you sell it. However, I personally wouldn't want a longer lens without IS, and have been consistently impressed with the 70-200/4 L IS that I've been shooting with for the past half dozen years. It has better IQ than the older 70-200/2.8's, and is much smaller and lighter. So I second Robin's recommendation.</p>

[gregory_imler]

<p>Thanks for the replies. I had the 70-200 f4 but sold it toward the 2.8 after shooting a wedding. It was definitely sharp and had great IQ, but I found the extra stop of the 2.8 allowed me to keep my shutter speed higher--and i've been consistently impressed by its own IQ. I didn't get a whole lot benefit from the IS in those fast situations, and definitely not the 3 or so stops as claimed by Canon. I do a lot of fashion and headshots, and for that the 85 has been relatively ideal. Though when it's a beauty assignment the compression of the 135-200 range can look fantastic. But then again, those studio situations bring up the issue of shooting tethered, as MUAs often like to be able to see detail to fix any issues on the spot. </p>

[kerry_grim]

I went from a 40D that I used for may years to a 6D. I am not sure why Orlando says the 6D screen is bad (if I am reading correctly). I was immediately comfortable with the 6D. I also like the slightly smaller size. Having taken 1000s of photos with the 6D, I used the 40D and realized the shutter was so loud, I was embarrassed! Just remember, you will loose the crop factor if going full frame. The 6D does not have a lot of extra bells and whistles, and, at least for me, does not need to.

[gregory_imler]

<p>Thanks, Kerry. I think Orlando was speaking about the 5D original's screen ... which is horrible. And I currently only have full-frame bodies so not worried about the crop/full conversions :)<br>

Actually had a beauty shoot today and came up against that conflicted situation I mentioned where the 70-200 looks great, but it's almost embarrassing showing mua's the work on the back of the 5D with its greenish-tinted, small screen. Almost thinking the 85 on a 6D would be better because, even if not tethered, everyone involved could see the image more accurately and the higher resolution would make tight crops possible. The 5D's 13mp start to show limitations if someone wants a tight face crop of a shot that was shot wider originally.</p>