I have asked a few people on here but thought I'd broaden my advice pool-
I currently shoot with Canon 7d and 60d - I have 50mm 1.4, 35mm f2 and 17-50 f2.8
I want to use more available light and shoot in low light - I find the 50mm too tight for most things on my crop body and my 35 not always fast enough and also sometimes too tight and the 17-50 f2.8 not fast enough in low light
So do I upgrade to a full frame so I can push my iso or do I buy a sigma art lens 24mm or 35mm (will I have an distortion using a 24mm on a crop body?)
I shoot mostly kids, families and newborns
Thanks in advance!!
The Sigma lenses are very expensive, more than a 6D full frame. While the 6D is getting a bit long in the tooth, a replacement surely must be coming this year, it is an excellent low light performer, significantly better than the 5Diii actually, and you should be able to push the ISO two more complete stops than you can on the 7D for the same noise content, which is no great shakes as a low light performer anyway. The 60D similarly. You can probably do well pricewise with a used body from a reputable source, say KEH, and even better if you want to take your chances on eBay. I'd go for a used 6D body. I wouldn't buy it new. Something like this. https://www.keh.com/shop/canon-eos-6d-20-2-megapixel-digital-slr-camera-body-only.html
You will have less distortion on a cropped sensor body than on a FF, since you are cropping away the edges of the full frame. It's at those edges that wide angle distortion becomes most apparent. And it's a lot more than just the "edges" that are cropped away, the APS-C frame is less than 1/2 the area of a FF.
@jessiolsenphotography Hi! I looked at your album, I think you would benefit from full frame considering the work you do. However, I want to mention two additional things to consider in making the jump. The first is equivalent focal length. Currently your using a 35mm and a 50mm, with the 50mm showing up the most in your album...probably because it's your fastest lens I would guess? Now, you mentioned that the 35mm is often "too tight". Ok, when you put your 50mm on a 6D full frame, the field of view through the lens will be similar to that of the 35mm on your 7D. To get a similar field of view (and distance from camera to subject that you're used to shooting) with your 7D/50mm, you would feel more comfortable with a 85mm lens. Otherwise you'll probably just adjust by getting a little closer to your subject which is absolutely fine...I just wanted to bring up the adjustment you'll find yourself making with either 1) a different focal length lens, or 2) standing closer than you are currently used to - but will likely adjust without even thinking about it really.
Second, when considering the focal length equivalence, the equivalent depth of field is also narrower..typically something that photographers using full frame generally embrace. I have a feeling an even narrower depth of field will probably fit your newborn work. But, it's something to keep in the back of your mind --- being sure to nail that focus is even more important with full frame especially when close to subject. However, having looked through your album you're nailing that as it is so I don't anticipate any real shooting adjustment there for you.
I also agree with Frank's advice to take a hard look at used. I also buy used. These camera bodies depreciate so rapidly which is only good for us when it comes to tax time LOL. Anyway, I hope I didn't add any confusion, just merely wanted to mention that if you do choose full frame you may find yourself adjusting a little with your prime lenses. Really enjoyed viewing your work, I'll be following...
@dbj_365 DbJ has all the details of "focal length equivalence" and "DoF equivalence," This last is often forgotten, perhaps not even understood. All right on. You will find shooting with these same lenses on a FF body EYE-OPENING! I would bet that the 50mm would be your go-to on, for example, a 6D. As cramped as you currently find it on your APS-C bodies. All as DbJ describes.
@frankhymus@dbj_365 thank-you for your input. Yes I do find that I use the 50mm a lot because it's the widest aperture I have but find it hard in tight spaces. Price wise I find the art lens and ff body to be pretty close. If I get a 24mm 1.4, it will give me a little more flexibility when working in tight quarters or when shooting down at a baby for example but maybe that lens will not be so useful down the road when I switch to full frame. On the other hand, switching to full frame will also give me the focal length I'm looking for using the 35mm I already have. I might be able to bump my iso up a couple stops if I go ff - but I can also get 4 more stops of light by getting a faster lens right? I feel like I still don't know which way to go. FF body, I could better utilize my 50mm - But new lens I could continue to use a camera I'm comfortable with and still switch down the road and I can use my 50 as almost an 85 still and have 3 focal lengths to choose from with decent low light capabilities (24 as a 35ish, 35 as a 50ish and my 50 as a 85ish lens)
For your purposes you need to look at the "Sports" score, an ISO number. This is the maximum ISO that can give you good color depth (18 bits), decent enough Dynamic Range (9EV) and good signal-to-noise ratio (30 dB). The scores are
60D 813
7D 854
6D 2340 (Three times the APS-C cameras you have).
Bottom line, you can push the ISO at least three stops more than your current cameras, and if you are prepared to sacrifice a little more noise (get rid of it in the editor for example), the 6D will surely allow you to push 4+ stops for the same performance on either of your current cameras. A FF sensor is much more amenable to being pushed at the boundaries than an APS-C, the 60D and the 7D falling off much more rapidly above this "Sports Scenario" ISO.
I really think you will be far better served by a FF camera than continuing to buy expensive lenses to mount on older bodies that are, to say the least, mediocre as regards absolute sensor performance.
@frankhymus yes I'm saying getting a 24mm art that falls in the range of my 17-50 f2.8 gives me 4 stops.
I'm sure you're right about the ff being the next move - especially because I will not truly know where I want to spend money on lenses until I see which focal length I lack with a new body's perspective. Perhaps I will sell my 60d (as it doesn't allow for lens calibration) and maybe use my 7d as my 2nd shooter and still utilize some of my crop lenses until I have enough variety in FF. I'm nervous for the change but excited to experience more freedom in higher iso range. Thanks for taking the time to talk it out with me as I am the type that needs all pros and cons layed out. Now to find the best price for the used - I like the site you posted thanks!!
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
https://www.keh.com/shop/canon-eos-6d-20-2-megapixel-digital-slr-camera-body-only.html
You will have less distortion on a cropped sensor body than on a FF, since you are cropping away the edges of the full frame. It's at those edges that wide angle distortion becomes most apparent. And it's a lot more than just the "edges" that are cropped away, the APS-C frame is less than 1/2 the area of a FF.
Second, when considering the focal length equivalence, the equivalent depth of field is also narrower..typically something that photographers using full frame generally embrace. I have a feeling an even narrower depth of field will probably fit your newborn work. But, it's something to keep in the back of your mind --- being sure to nail that focus is even more important with full frame especially when close to subject. However, having looked through your album you're nailing that as it is so I don't anticipate any real shooting adjustment there for you.
I also agree with Frank's advice to take a hard look at used. I also buy used. These camera bodies depreciate so rapidly which is only good for us when it comes to tax time LOL. Anyway, I hope I didn't add any confusion, just merely wanted to mention that if you do choose full frame you may find yourself adjusting a little with your prime lenses. Really enjoyed viewing your work, I'll be following...
https://www.dxomark.com/best-canon-cameras-under-45200-dollars
For your purposes you need to look at the "Sports" score, an ISO number. This is the maximum ISO that can give you good color depth (18 bits), decent enough Dynamic Range (9EV) and good signal-to-noise ratio (30 dB). The scores are
60D 813
7D 854
6D 2340 (Three times the APS-C cameras you have).
Bottom line, you can push the ISO at least three stops more than your current cameras, and if you are prepared to sacrifice a little more noise (get rid of it in the editor for example), the 6D will surely allow you to push 4+ stops for the same performance on either of your current cameras. A FF sensor is much more amenable to being pushed at the boundaries than an APS-C, the 60D and the 7D falling off much more rapidly above this "Sports Scenario" ISO.
I really think you will be far better served by a FF camera than continuing to buy expensive lenses to mount on older bodies that are, to say the least, mediocre as regards absolute sensor performance.
@dbj_365
BTW, f/2 to f/1.4 is only two stops. f/2.8 to f/1.4 is four.
I'm sure you're right about the ff being the next move - especially because I will not truly know where I want to spend money on lenses until I see which focal length I lack with a new body's perspective. Perhaps I will sell my 60d (as it doesn't allow for lens calibration) and maybe use my 7d as my 2nd shooter and still utilize some of my crop lenses until I have enough variety in FF. I'm nervous for the change but excited to experience more freedom in higher iso range. Thanks for taking the time to talk it out with me as I am the type that needs all pros and cons layed out. Now to find the best price for the used - I like the site you posted thanks!!