When I got my 650d I knew basically nothing about photography, but now I've grasped it and have really learned how everything works, I've found I'm kinda limited with it. The flippy touch screen is nice but I can't help but feel it's a bit gimmicky and unnecessary when I'm not doing video at all. 7D has 10 more AF points, shutter lag is halved and battery life is almost double what I'm getting now. Any thoughts?
Canon is coming out with a 7D succesor soon and the 7D is outdated already as it is. Noise performance isn't really good. The 650D has the same sensor. So i'd say no.
What kind of photographs do you take?
Not worth it, wait for the new one
If you have that kind of money to spend, I'd say go full frame.
[QUOTE=frag4life;40744183]Canon is coming out with a 7D succesor soon and the 7D is outdated already as it is. Noise performance isn't really good. The 650D has the same sensor. So i'd say no.
What kind of photographs do you take?[/QUOTE]
I do a bit of everything really, I haven't really developed a "style" yet. I quite like doing low light shots. I'm going to be investing in a 50mm 1.4 lens with whatever camera I upgrade to.
[editline]22nd May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;40744263]If you have that kind of money to spend, I'd say go full frame.[/QUOTE]
I thought the 7D was full frame no?
[QUOTE=Gustafa;40744272]I do a bit of everything really, I haven't really developed a "style" yet. I quite like doing low light shots. I'm going to be investing in a 50mm 1.4 lens with whatever camera I upgrade to.
[editline]22nd May 2013[/editline]
I thought the 7D was full frame no?[/QUOTE]
Nope.
6D is full frame, but it's not really that similar to the 7D. The 7D is more for sports and stuff
If it weren't for the AF system the 6D had, I would have advised it hands down. But the AF system on the 6D actually even isn't as good as the AF system the 650D has.(1 cross type point of the 11 AF points on the 6D vs all 9 on the 650D) Strange, but true.
[QUOTE=Gustafa;40744272]
I thought the 7D was full frame no?[/QUOTE]
If you didn't know the 7D wasn't full-frame, you might want to do more research. Learn about everything it can and can't do.
Anyway the 7D isn't any better than your 650D at low-light. If you want the best low-light performance, 6D is the way to go.
I hate how Canon has been screwing around all these years with the same mediocre 18MP sensor. It's time they update things in that respect.
[QUOTE=frag4life;40745547]If it weren't for the AF system the 6D had, I would have advised it hands down. But the AF system on the 6D actually even isn't as good as the AF system the 650D has.(1 cross type point of the 11 AF points on the 6D vs all 9 on the 650D) Strange, but true.[/QUOTE]
Well, considering he's into low-light shooting, the AF system of the 6D is actually far superior. Center point goes to -3EV, and it has 11 AF points. The fact that the 650D has 9 cross-types doesn't make [i]that[/i] much of a difference, right?
Cross types are hugely important
[QUOTE=Gustafa;40744065]When I got my 650d I knew basically nothing about photography, but now I've grasped it and have really learned how everything works, I've found I'm kinda limited with it. The flippy touch screen is nice but I can't help but feel it's a bit gimmicky and unnecessary when I'm not doing video at all. 7D has 10 more AF points, shutter lag is halved and battery life is almost double what I'm getting now. Any thoughts?[/QUOTE]
Technical advantages will not make you a better photographer. Spend the money on a trip somewhere (even if it's for a day) and take interesting photos.
[editline]23rd May 2013[/editline]
alternative viewpoint fish 2013
[QUOTE=The Salmon;40750412]Technical advantages will not make you a better photographer. Spend the money on a trip somewhere (even if it's for a day) and take interesting photos.
[editline]23rd May 2013[/editline]
alternative viewpoint fish 2013[/QUOTE]
I disagree a little bit, if you know how to use it better gear will help you achieve the shots you want, I know that my a77 has made it easier for me to translate visions from my head into actual pictures. But you have to really know where your current setup is lacking and know what would improve those aspects
But a trip is equally as important for photos, they can be a serious learning experience
[QUOTE=Trogdon;40750575]I disagree a little bit, if you know how to use it better gear will help you achieve the shots you want, I know that my a77 has made it easier for me to translate visions from my head into actual pictures. But you have to really know where your current setup is lacking and know what would improve those aspects
But a trip is equally as important for photos, they can be a serious learning experience[/QUOTE]
A 650D to a 7D is not that sort of advantage though, it's a specification jump.
Agreed on that for the most part. The 7D would be good for paid work, other than that it's a moot step up for pretty much all other reasons
I am actually thinking about downgrading my 7D to something like a 550D or something.
The speed is something I don't need, neither are all of the focus points because I always just use the middle one. The big viewfinder and weathersealing are nice but something I can do without.
The reason for this is I realised I don't need an expensive camera to be good at photography. I also know I have so much more to learn about light and composition, something a better camera won't help you instantly get better at. A 550D has the same sensor and thus the same image quality. Pro's are that it's lighter and smaller which will encourage me to make quick snaps more often instead of lugging my 7D around all the time. Not that it's such a huge burden but I've always liked to travel light when going on a walk or something.
I don't know if this sounds hipster or not, but Instagram(and Edwin Quast) kinda showed me that even a cellphone camera can capture great photo's when light is good and you can find a nice composition.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is, use what you've got to the fullest. Only when you've reached the limit is it time to move on to something better.
I'd go for the 6D or wait for the new 7D. 6D is awesome, it's pretty much a slightly smaller 5D3 but £700-900 cheaper, and the performance difference isn't worth that much at all.
Yes it only really has one usable AF point, but I've only ever not used the center AF point about maybe once in every 1000 shots, so for me it wasn't a deal breaker at all. Also the AF point has -3ev of focusing sensitivity, which I think is the most sensitive in any DSLR available yet(?)
[QUOTE=The Salmon;40750412]alternative viewpoint fish 2013[/QUOTE]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/9zTZKsX.jpg[/img]
isn't the 650D an almost brand new camera?
[editline]24th May 2013[/editline]
has OP gone from knowing shite all to being able to justify a $1000+ replacement in a few months?
[editline]24th May 2013[/editline]
i'm on a 600D and if someone offered me a 5D2 i'd take it, but like, i don't feel it would be a totally worthwhile upgrade for me.
[editline]24th May 2013[/editline]
what is limiting about the 650D, op?
I have a 7D. I use it for sports, it is VERY good for sports for the price.
[QUOTE=Elfy;40767827]I have a 7D. I use it for sports, it is VERY good for sports for the price.[/QUOTE]
I would think that the ISO performance can be limiting in anything other than broad daylight for action-stopping shots, but then again I've never really done sports-shooting.
[QUOTE=Raygen;40794109]I would think that the ISO performance can be limiting in anything other than broad daylight for action-stopping shots, but then again I've never really done sports-shooting.[/QUOTE]
The AF system in the 7D is really great. Plus APS-C in general is good for sports, something like a 70-200mm f2.8 becomes longer, and is still a fast lens, becomes like 105-300mm. A 300mm 2.8 for FF would cost a lot more for instance. The deeper DoF also makes it easier to focus, so you dot have to stop down as much if at all.
I mean FF would probably be preferable because of the low light, but APS-C is significantly cheaper to do and you can get tighter shots which is good.
[QUOTE=Trogdon;40794743]The AF system in the 7D is really great. Plus APS-C in general is good for sports, something like a 70-200mm f2.8 becomes longer, and is still a fast lens, becomes like 105-300mm. A 300mm 2.8 for FF would cost a lot more for instance. The deeper DoF also makes it easier to focus, so you dot have to stop down as much if at all.
I mean FF would probably be preferable because of the low light, but APS-C is significantly cheaper to do and you can get tighter shots which is good.[/QUOTE]
Ah I forgot this. Very true.
Anyway the successor to the 7D won't be arriving this year, but the announcement will (around August?). That's all I know. Oh, and the (rumored) specs:
24.1 megapixel APS-C Sensor
Dual DIGIC V
10 fps
Dual card slots
61 AF points (same as the 1D X and the 5D III)
3,2 inch LCD-screen
Similar build quality to the 5D Mark III
GPS and Wifi (just like the 6D)
Pricing around €2200,00 / $2850,00
Improved ISO performance, even nearing the 5DIII
More video options
Canon also [URL="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/05/new-af-technology-coming-in-july-cr1/"]seems to be working on a new autofocus technology[/URL] that would then first appear in the 70D. Interesting stuff.
I really wouldn't bother upgrading. I have a 7D which although has a better AF system and higher shooting rate than the 650D its not that much of an improvement for the money. Plus as already stated there is a successor to the 7D just around the corner, and if that or a full frame is too expensive then you'd probably be better looking at a 1D mkIII rather than a 7D
I jumped ship from Canon over to Nikon recently and got myself the new D7100. Haven't regretted it for a single second. Noise performance on higher ISOs is amazing for a crop sensor, not to mention its 51 point AF and lack of an optical low pass filter.
Not really a contributition to the discussion but it seems appropriate to what's being discussed.
I have a 5D1 - what would be a worthwhile upgrade for me?
[Don't say 5D3, simply too expensive :( ]
[QUOTE=Wickerman123;41157897]Not really a contributition to the discussion but it seems appropriate to what's being discussed.
I have a 5D1 - what would be a worthwhile upgrade for me?
[Don't say 5D3, simply too expensive :( ][/QUOTE]
That's simple then. 6D.
[QUOTE=Wickerman123;41157897]Not really a contributition to the discussion but it seems appropriate to what's being discussed.
I have a 5D1 - what would be a worthwhile upgrade for me?
[Don't say 5D3, simply too expensive :( ][/QUOTE]
There's not much to upgrade to in an image quality perspective. A lot of Canons offerings today have better AF systems but not sure if that's what you're looking for. As far as ISO performance goes it would have to be the 5D3 or 6D.
[QUOTE=Raygen;41187112]There's not much to upgrade to in an image quality perspective. A lot of Canons offerings today have better AF systems but not sure if that's what you're looking for. As far as ISO performance goes it would have to be the 5D3 or 6D.[/QUOTE]
Well the ISO performance is a biggie, better AF would also be nice.
Higher MP count wouldn't hurt either, seen as 12MP is pretty mediocre nowadays.
Also, does the 6D do [good] video? I really want to get into videography but a wee Panasonic Camcorder simply don't cut it.
The 6D does video very well. Ofcourse not 5D Mark III level, but it's pretty much on par with the 5D Mark II.
[QUOTE=frag4life;41238397]The 6D does video very well. Ofcourse not 5D Mark III level, but it's pretty much on par with the 5D Mark II.[/QUOTE]
Yep, improved low-light capabilities are the only changes video-wise on the 6D, compared to the 5DII. Offers the same codecs as the 5DIII but that's pretty much it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
