Canon 6D With Full Frame Sensor

[DonH50]

Thanks Steve. Definitely is for me, who wants "what's best" but the bank account says "what's good" or maybe "what you can get by with". This is going to be well above any camera I've ever owned (possibly excepted by my early film days when I worked as a gopher and fill-shot guy for a wedding photographer) and I'm pretty excited. The $1500 price difference between the 5D and 6D is that nice L-series 70-200 mm zoom, or another month's rent for my boy (ok, so he lost ). The price and fact the image quality is almost identical was the deal-maker for me. The 6D adds a couple of neat features (GPS and WiFI built-in) and gives up some advanced programming, autofocus grid resolution, and "extreme" weathersealing, things I can live without. I can also live without the extra weight of the 5D. My wife knows our finances but has also heard me whine since my Minolta DSLR died many years ago, noted prices likely won't go down, and said to get it before we retire and have no money for toys.

Be here Wed, wonder how many vacation days I have?

 

[Keith_W]

I have owned many zoom lenses from 17mm all the way up to 400mm: the 17-40/4L, 24-70/2.8L, 70-200/2.8L IS, and 100-400L. Right now I only own two lenses - the 50/1.2L and the 85/1.2L. I have given up on zooms, telephoto, and wide angle! I never thought I would see the day when I could live with only one lens, but right now the 50/1.2L is doing a really good job persuading me to sell the 85L and stay with one lens only.

 

[DonH50]

All about what you shoot... A 50 is "the" standard lens, though I actually prefer a little longer for portraits, but in my world I may shoot a hummingbird on the feeder, a vista of the front range, a chipmunk on the car hood, a mountain meadow with a stream, glaciers on the far peaks, a group of bighorns, the fam in front of the distant peaks, ground flowers, and an elk grazing, all on the same trip. I need like 20 to 1200 mm, with macro!

 

[amirm]

Congrats Don. I feel a sense of responsibility for pushing you toward the 70-200. You have to let me know when you use it whether you agree .

 

[DonH50]

Yup, it's all your fault. Seriously, I greatly appreciate your advice and am looking forward to trying it out. I never dreamed I'd actually own a couple of L-series lenses, but now just give me a couple of days... We were heading to the local mountains for a short shooting (gun, not camera) trip last weekend but got turned around due to a small fire on the mountain, and the fire danger is just getting worse. Hoping to get up this weekend and try out the camera!

I caved and bought a Tamron long zoom (SP 200-500) that has gotten decent reviews. It is not up to the Canon L series, only f5-6.3 and no IS so bright light only (or stable tripod), but on sale and with extra discounts gives me a 200-500 mm zoom for <$1k so I decided to take the risk. Got a B+W UV filter for the front -- after trying a bunch of different filters over the years decided these are best for me, though a bit pricey. This gives me an outfit to last a lifetime, or until I win the lottery.

For you and all: How sensitive are these cameras to dust collection during field lens swaps? I have read a variety of opinions from horror stories to it hardly matters... Since the sensor never gets moved I imagine it has to be more sensitive than film (where the next frame is a new sensor) but I also noted all the higher-end cameras include some sort of dust mitigation, including vibrating the sensor and software that "patches" dust spots. the worst-case scenario seems to be out on a trail with a general lens in place and seeing a distant critter that forces a quick switch to along lens so no time to really stop and shelter. I used to carry a kitchen trash bag doubled up so I could change "in the bag" in those situations. I would swap out the bag when I got home if I used it (no waste, it went into the trash can to be filled normally).

I should probably start a couple of threads on filters and tripods, but for now I am set with the filters I have (or have ordered) and my old tripod. I suspect I am going to be wanting a new lightweight but sturdier tripod soon, however. Amazing how they've improved in the past decade or two -- I picked up a heavy-looking 'pod with a hefty ball mount and about dropped it as it was so much lighter than I anticipated! Never thought about dropping $500+ on a tripod but that one was tempting... Unfortunately I have forgotten the brand and have not been back to the store (I prefer local stores but the service I got at the one high-end camera shop in town was terrible; I have to assume they had a bad day, but they lost a sale).

 

[Keith_W]

How sensitive it is to dust depends on your usage. I once brought my camera along to a rally event. It was really dusty! I changed lenses ONCE and I could already see dust bunnies on the sensor. Make sure you follow best practice and only change lenses with your camera pointing down, and in a non-dusty area.

 

[amirm]

Unfortunately dust can be a serious problem. My 5D always has dust on its sensor. Blowing the sensor off gets it to manageable level. The other day I grabbed the camera and started to use it, only to find 20+ dust spots on each image! The biggest impact is in landscape shots where you stop down and have something like blue sky that shows them well. Wide open aperture blurs them out and they are not visible. If you only pull out a handful of images per shoot, then it is pretty easy to remove them in photoshop. The healing brush these days is very good at removing them. If not, the clone brush will do it if you are careful and find an area that has similar pixels. The ultrasonic shaker in my pro cameras is very good at keeping dust away.

On tripod, the standard is Gitzo carbon fiber. They are extremely light and importantly, extremely reliable. I first bought a different brand of carbon fiber (bogen?) only to have one of the leg locks fail. This was a dedicated wildlife photoshoot in a remote area and I was out of business trying to hold a massive telephoto lens without it working. The Gitzo is insanely expensive, in the area of $500 you noticed. They used to have a serious flaw where you could not lock each segment of the leg in random order. The "6X" series fixed that a few years ago. I have not kept up with them to know if they have something new. But the 6X series is perfect. Note that they have a wide range of tripods and you will need to seriously examine which one fits your needs. I could not decide and I wound up 6 of them or so! For example, I have a massive one for my wildlife work with massive lens. While as carbon fiber goes, it is very light it is still bulkier and heavier than my ultralight versions.

Here is a cool thing. I find that even the smallest, tiniest Gitzo carbon fiber that has legs smaller than your finger, I can put massive cameras and lenses on them, way being their spec! So don't be afraid to undersize if weight and packing size is important (it is for me as I don't like to check my critical camera in when I fly). Not saying you should undersize but don't feel guilty if you have to. If you have IS it will compensate for increased vibration.

BTW, if you did not get a cable release, you need one for landscape work. For wildlife I do not use one as you need speed to catch the action and finger works much better than that. But otherwise, the cable release helps a lot with keeping even lightweight tripods stable.

 

[Keith_W]

BTW, if you did not get a cable release, you need one for landscape work. For wildlife I do not use one as you need speed to catch the action and finger works much better than that. But otherwise, the cable release helps a lot with keeping even lightweight tripods stable.

Don't think he needs one, Amir. There is an Android app that allows you to control the 6D via wifi.

 

[amirm]

Oh, another unfortunately expensive accessory that is a "must have" is "arca swiss" quick mounts for your camera and lenses. These are standard issue for anyone serious about photography. Arca Swiss invented the dovetail mount system that slides in and out of a ball head. Other companies have since cloned it to better results. There are now custom mounts for each lens and camera. There are two companies that make and sell them. One is the "really right stuff" http://reallyrightstuff.com/Index.aspx?code=46&key=fr. I forget the name of the competitor.

Then you get a ball head that hopefully has progressive locking. Arca Swiss makes one of the best but competitors have alternatives. The ball head is not yesterday's ball head. They work extremely well in how they lock and hold their position. And progressive ones keep the head from suddenly dropping. When combined with the above quick mount plates, they make mounting and dismounting very quick so you can catch that action. And importantly they are very secure.

That said, if you only have one body and your lens do not have tripod mounts, then this can wait. To the extent you will be buying something else though, save your money for this option. It is the system everyone uses these days.

 

[Steve williams]

Not sure i understand "lens"mounts as compared to tripod mounts

 

[DonH50]

Thanks guys!

Cable release, rats, I even looked at them and did not get one, duh! Had one in my cart then started looking at others and forgot to add one in. I don't have a smart phone. OTOH, it is not a critical thing, yet. I am guessing my old film-era cable release no longer works on these new-fangled thangs...

Yes, Gitzo sounds familiar, that was probably it. The 'pod and ball was ~$750 to $1200 depending upon ball. Arca also sounds very familiar, whether because it was on the tripod or due to other reading I can't say. It was last year when I looked. I notice current prices for Gitzo or RRS are around $850 for the travel versions (4-section legs). I will be using my old one for a bit yet...

Steve, big honkin' lenses have their own tripod fitting, so the lens mounts to the tripod and the camera hangs off the end of the lens. The big Tamron is such a beast, as are most of the >300 mm or so lenses (and some shorter, epecially the f2.8'ish models, as they get very heavy, a trade for the large aperture). Look at this link to the Tamron and notice the "foot" on the bottom -- that is to mount on a tripod. http://tamron-usa.com/lenses/prod/200500mm.asp#ad-image-0

 

[Steve williams]

understood. That's what I thought but needed the clarification

 

[amirm]

Meant the same thing Steve. Short hand for lens tripod mount . Was referring to these guys on the larger lenses:

 

[Steve williams]

so at what size lens would you recommend a lens mount

 

[DonH50]

Tends to be personal, but I start thinking about them when the lens weighs about 2x the camera and up -- it gets hard to hold the camera when it is front-heavy. In terms of lens size, well, a 200 mm f/2.8 may weigh as much or more than a 400 mm f/4 so you really have to look at lens size, weight, and how it feels to you. I do not like to hold, nor place on a tripod, a camera/lens that feels significantly off-balance. I want the weight center over the tripod mount, and that determines if I use a lens mount (foot on the lens or optional ring to add a foot to the lens) or camera mount.

 

[amirm]

It is a weight thing. You don't want to mount the tripod on the camera and have this massive weight hanging from end of it. To show an example, the 70-200 f4 does not have one but the 70-200 f2.8 does as the latter is substantially heavier. When the lens has it, you always want to use it instead of the one on camera. Fortunately with some rare exceptions, when the lens needs it, it comes with it. An example of the exception is the 70-200 f4 where it is optional. On that lens, I have used it without and while it is marginal, it is OK.

The other reason is stability by the way. By mounting the tripod to the lens, it will vibrate less. Theoretically speaking .

One other bonus is that you can instantly go from horizontal to vertical shooting by loosening the ring and rotating the lens and hence camera. This is superior to doing the same on camera since the center of the image does not change. Whereas on tripod, the camera shifts position and you have to re-frame.

 

[DonH50]

Camera arrived late today, just in time for us to go on pre-evac due to the wildfire just down the road. Lens is supposed to be here tomorrow, but we may not be here. Plan on bugging out late-morn or early afternoon (depending on what the fire does). Box is pretty, but it will stay in it for a bit.

A Gitzo traveler tripod with one of their heads looks very impressive, but at $1k is way more than I can afford for a tripod. Have to start a "best $250 and under" tripod thread. I found a "best tripod under $500" thread on a camera forum...

Y'all be safe - Don

 

[garylkoh]

For an on-camera shoe flash, I find a blow-up softbox indispensable. The one I have is this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/42239-REG/Photoflex_XT_OCLRG_II_On_Camera_XTC_II_Softbox.html

Unfortunately discontinued, but doing a search online there are lots of cheap knock-offs now.

The other indispensable is a good tripod and ball-head. Gitzo/Acra-Swiss would be my preference, but a slightly cheaper alternative is Manfrotto. I currently use one with ball-head for all my office work.

 

[DonH50]

Sorry to bring up an old thread but I am actually thinking about finally using my 6D. It was packed away the day I got it due to last summer's fires. I have since taken it out of the box but almost nothing more. With the standard 24-70 L, 70 - 200 L, and a Tamron 200-500 mm (couldn't afford the Canon version of this beast), flash, and usual accessories I am looking for a good case. I got a couple of suggestions in another thread but figured I'd try here since I need to order something this weekend (yes, I put it off too long). I bought the suggested Canon case when I bought the camera but it is a little small even for the DSLR plus two small lenses, not really room for the flash, and not even close to fitting the Tamron. I would like two cases:

• A hard travel case, something like the Nanuk 940 or 945 (hard to tell exactly how big to get): http://www.amazon.com/Nanuk-Case-Cu...11_3_EDDB?ie=UTF8&refRID=0GX304DTY5CSF1STEDDB I am debating between cubed foal and dividers; potentially more room and much easier to reconfigure with dividers, but generally not as protective as fowm.
• A backpack or shoulder bag style case with room for camera and the short and long lens, plus a water bottle or two, small first-aide kit, usual short-hike stuff.

Open to suggestions! I'd prefer to not spend a fortune, but it looks like a hard case is going to be around $150 - $200 and guessing a backpack will be in the $50 - $100 range. Think Tank was suggested for the backpack but I am having a hard time deciding which model would be suitable for light hiking around the hills. They are also around $200, more than I expected but OTOH it's a few k$ in camera gear so I don't mind spending a bit more on protecting it. A Gitzo tripod is out of range for now...

p.s. The Lowe Flipside 300 also looks like a contender...

Thanks in advance - Don