Step up to FF: Sony A7 or Canon 6D?

Pressure · Jun 17, 2016

I am struggling with a decision and I could really use your help.

Some years ago DPR members helped me choose and use a Sony Nex 5N, which I use with various E-mount and Canon FD lenses - E16 + UWA, E35, FD50.14, FD 28, FD 24. I could really use an EVF in the sunshine, better AF, and definitely more dials and better ergonomics (the Nex 5n is a pain to use).

A few months back a friend loaned me a 6D with a 16-35 2.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 200. I absolutely loved it - especially with the 16-35, the image quality was just there, straight away. Ergonomics and creativity were fantastic. The 16-35 made it a bit heavy and unwieldy but it was marvellous.

I now want to try to get into full frame, without spending too much money, preferably before a trip to the Swiss alps this summer. Wide angle landscape and architectural shots are important to me, as is low light fast moving shots (mainly gigs /dJ sets).

And I am in a quandary.

I can get used 6D and say a 17-40 F4 and get wonderful full frame without too much weight. But there are downsides to this, and there are choices.

The downside is that there's still a lot of weight. I'm also concerned about the 6D's lack of a flip out screen - I find this HUGELY useful on my Nex 5N. I also found autofocus occasionally troublesome when the focus point is near the edge of the frame (for obvious reasons).

And I am also looking at another option - a used Sony A7, which are becoming affordable (less than a 6d).

This gives me the flip out screen, and maybe better autofocus than a 6D - certainly better than my Nex 5N. The size and weight are quite a bit better.

I can also treat an A7 as an upgrade to my Nex 5N and use y existing E mount lenses in APS-c mode. I can even use them in full frame mode and crop out the vignetting in post too. And via adapters I can use my old Canon FD glass.

Of course the upside of Canon is that once you have an FF camera, you have lots of lens options and they are not expensive - probably a 17-40,a 50 1.4, and an 85 1.8.

A7 has more expensive lenses, though I can also get the kid 28-70 relatively cheaply too. The FE 50mm isn't too much money, the kit lens does 24-28mm quite well, and I could use the 10-18 with a bit of cropping from 12-17mm. I could even put the 17-40 on an A7 and get decent results (with slow or no AF).

So. Should I go for a pure native full frame Canon option that has excellent glass but compromises on ergonomics (the flip out screen and the EVF).

Or should I go for an extension of the current system which reuses my existing investment, has some ergonomic upsides, and compromise lens choice?

All thoughts gratefully accepted!

James Larsen · Jun 17, 2016

I would honestly just stick with sony to be honest. Sony has some good glass as well...just invest in that.

Pressure · Jun 17, 2016

Many thanks for the insight James - especially since you're a 6D guy!

James Larsen · Jun 17, 2016

No problem.

I love the 6D, its no doubt a great camera.

Just considering you have Sony lenses already, I don't see a point in changing the system.

Limburger · Jun 17, 2016

In november did some research and I went with the A7 for walkaround and some venues.

If you typically shoot low light, the 6D is the obvious choice imho.

Better AF and better AF...

The 6D has 9 AF points and only the center point is cross type yet it can lock up to -3EV, so therefor for low light 6D is the benchmark, the A7 goes to 0EV.

The A7 shines when using small primes (AF/MF), peaking and zebra work beautifully.

It got more AF points to be moved around with a press of a button using the dials to horizontally and vertically move them about.

So up to you what is more important, the flexibility of more points or one that is quick and go really dark.

beagle1 · Jun 17, 2016

Pressure said:
I am struggling with a decision and I could really use your help.

Some years ago DPR members helped me choose and use a Sony Nex 5N, which I use with various E-mount and Canon FD lenses - E16 + UWA, E35, FD50.14, FD 28, FD 24. I could really use an EVF in the sunshine, better AF, and definitely more dials and better ergonomics (the Nex 5n is a pain to use).

A few months back a friend loaned me a 6D with a 16-35 2.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 200. I absolutely loved it - especially with the 16-35, the image quality was just there, straight away. Ergonomics and creativity were fantastic. The 16-35 made it a bit heavy and unwieldy but it was marvellous.

I now want to try to get into full frame, without spending too much money, preferably before a trip to the Swiss alps this summer. Wide angle landscape and architectural shots are important to me, as is low light fast moving shots (mainly gigs /dJ sets).

And I am in a quandary.

I can get used 6D and say a 17-40 F4 and get wonderful full frame without too much weight. But there are downsides to this, and there are choices.

The downside is that there's still a lot of weight. I'm also concerned about the 6D's lack of a flip out screen - I find this HUGELY useful on my Nex 5N. I also found autofocus occasionally troublesome when the focus point is near the edge of the frame (for obvious reasons).

And I am also looking at another option - a used Sony A7, which are becoming affordable (less than a 6d).

This gives me the flip out screen, and maybe better autofocus than a 6D - certainly better than my Nex 5N. The size and weight are quite a bit better.

I can also treat an A7 as an upgrade to my Nex 5N and use y existing E mount lenses in APS-c mode. I can even use them in full frame mode and crop out the vignetting in post too. And via adapters I can use my old Canon FD glass.

Of course the upside of Canon is that once you have an FF camera, you have lots of lens options and they are not expensive - probably a 17-40,a 50 1.4, and an 85 1.8.

A7 has more expensive lenses, though I can also get the kid 28-70 relatively cheaply too. The FE 50mm isn't too much money, the kit lens does 24-28mm quite well, and I could use the 10-18 with a bit of cropping from 12-17mm. I could even put the 17-40 on an A7 and get decent results (with slow or no AF).

So. Should I go for a pure native full frame Canon option that has excellent glass but compromises on ergonomics (the flip out screen and the EVF).

Or should I go for an extension of the current system which reuses my existing investment, has some ergonomic upsides, and compromise lens choice?

All thoughts gratefully accepted!

if you have a lot of Sony lenses stick with sony, otherwise the 6D is good if you pair it with nice glass

Pressure · Jun 18, 2016

Thank you @Limberger and @Beagle1 for your thoughts.

This game is all about trade offs. I think if I buy FF Sony mirror less I will always be casting an envious eye at canon and Nikon shooters who enjoy better / cheaper lens selection, a simpler and easier (in some ways...) workflow and (arguably) nicer colours. Canikon users have an integrated system that is honed and optimised.

Sony Ff is by comparison less well honed. The original a7 in particular has big glaring downsides: lens choice and cost of course but also battery life and evf sensitivity.

But if I went canon full frame now I may pine for the real advantages of Sony nex - or at least may miss some features I've grown used to. Sony's phone like Evf and live view together with focus peaking are huge for me. I think I actually prefer Mirror less technology and design, and the size. An a7 is a compromised camera which performs poorly in some regards but as a relatively inexpensive used camera it is a good upgrade to a NEx which can also do FF, and it makes a lot of sense.

So im leaning that way - though I haven't quite made up my mind and I will hanker after a dslr!

golfhov · Jun 18, 2016

Pressure said:
I am struggling with a decision and I could really use your help.

Some years ago DPR members helped me choose and use a Sony Nex 5N, which I use with various E-mount and Canon FD lenses - E16 + UWA, E35, FD50.14, FD 28, FD 24. I could really use an EVF in the sunshine, better AF, and definitely more dials and better ergonomics (the Nex 5n is a pain to use).

You could also use a a6p00 for far less money

Pressure said:
A few months back a friend loaned me a 6D with a 16-35 2.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 200. I absolutely loved it - especially with the 16-35, the image quality was just there, straight away. Ergonomics and creativity were fantastic. The 16-35 made it a bit heavy and unwieldy but it was marvellous.

A lot to like

Pressure said:
I now want to try to get into full frame, without spending too much money, preferably before a trip to the Swiss alps this summer. Wide angle landscape and architectural shots are important to me, as is low light fast moving shots (mainly gigs /dJ sets).

If you are shooting low light with a 5n you know there is better stuff out there now.

Pressure said:
And I am in a quandary.

I can get used 6D and say a 17-40 F4 and get wonderful full frame without too much weight. But there are downsides to this, and there are choices.

The downside is that there's still a lot of weight.

In practical use I dont find the weight that bad. The bulk is really more noticeable.......

Pressure said:
I'm also concerned about the 6D's lack of a flip out screen - I find this HUGELY useful on my Nex 5N. I also found autofocus occasionally troublesome when the focus point is near the edge of the frame (for obvious reasons).

Hard to qualify this because you don't have a finder now but the entire liveview experience is a PITA on the 6d

Pressure said:
And I am also looking at another option - a used Sony A7, which are becoming affordable (less than a 6d).

This gives me the flip out screen, and maybe better autofocus than a 6D - certainly better than my Nex 5N.

Yeah it is kind of a mixed bag. The AF of the a7 is more flexible and better in most things but the xenter point on the 6d kills it in very low light

Pressure said:
The size and weight are quite a bit better.

Already mentioned. The ergonomics are a personal choice. I find both fine but slightly prefer the a7. Ymmv

Pressure said:
I can also treat an A7 as an upgrade to my Nex 5N and use y existing E mount lenses in APS-c mode. I can even use them in full frame mode and crop out the vignetting in post too. And via adapters I can use my old Canon FD glass.

Of course the upside of Canon is that once you have an FF camera, you have lots of lens options and they are not expensive - probably a 17-40,a 50 1.4, and an 85 1.8.

Pressure said:
A7 has more expensive lenses, though I can also get the kid 28-70 relatively cheaply too. The FE 50mm isn't too much money, the kit lens does 24-28mm quite well, and I could use the 10-18 with a bit of cropping from 12-17mm. I could even put the 17-40 on an A7 and get decent results (with slow or no AF).

If you grab the a7ii the adapted canon lenses mostly focus decently but not as good as native

Pressure said:
So. Should I go for a pure native full frame Canon option that has excellent glass but compromises on ergonomics (the flip out screen and the EVF).

As I said if you get the a7ii you can almost take the lens lineup out of the equation

Pressure said:
Or should I go for an extension of the current system which reuses my existing investment, has some ergonomic upsides, and compromise lens choice?

All thoughts gratefully accepted!

I think you could consider the a6000. It adds the main things that you want while reusing the glass you want.

If you REALLY want to go full frame I would look closely at the a7ii. It sounds like it may match up with your wishes a bit better. The a7 and 6d are both good cameras but have slightly different capabilities.

Pressure · Jun 18, 2016

Thanks @golfhov. I probably should look at the cost of a 7ii vs a 7 + canon adapters. Might actually turn out cheaper! Looking at videos the 17-40 focuses reasonably well even with the $100 adapters. And in low light I'd MF.

An a6000 would be a big step up. But I love full frame, it does something for my creativity.

Thanks again!

golfhov · Jun 18, 2016

Pressure said:
Thanks @golfhov. I probably should look at the cost of a 7ii vs a 7 + canon adapters. Might actually turn out cheaper!

It actually can......kind of depending on lenses wanted etc....one good example is the 70'200 f4 and 2.8 from canon are both pretty good but benefit from IS. The sony a7ii adds it without having to pay for the more expensive OSS versions

Pressure said:
Looking at videos the 17-40 focuses reasonably well even with the $100 adapters. And in low light I'd MF.

Decently. Most canon lenses focus ok with an adapter. The sony actually focuses ok in lower light than it sounds. Not as good as 6d. The cheaper adapters usually work just as well as the metabones. The af is superslow with the original a7. It is because they added PDAF through firmware updates to the ii and not the original. One small thing here is the liveview focusing with the 6d is accurate but painfully slow. Probably slower than the original a7 with the same lenses

Pressure said:
An a6000 would be a big step up. But I love full frame, it does something for my creativity.

Fair enough

Pressure said:
Thanks again!

I am assuming that you are an enthusiast and are not shooting sports. I really wouldnt use either for sports.

Pressure · Jun 22, 2016

So - my final decision was to go for a used Sony A7.

I wound up paying just £569 for this from Park Cameras - which is only £200 more than a used a6000 (maybe less). It was also less than most of the A7s on eBay that have sold recently.

My rationale was:

- A7 is lighter than A7ii

- £300+ saving pays for all or some of a decent lens (not sure what to get though)

- IBIS is useful but I don't use longer lenses ATM - it's a downside, but I can live with it. Same with the less AF on the A7.

The A7 arrived this morning - very fast, overnight delivery despite delivery being included in the price. It is mint condition - flawless. I have ordered the Sony screen protector.

I chucked my 35 1.8 on it and took a few snaps. APS-C shots work perfectly. FF has huge vignetting of course but still usable after cropping. And OMG!!!!! The perspective, the framing, the resolution and best of all THE DOF!!!! Absolutely fantastic.

Best of all it's SO light, scarcely feels heavier or bigger than my NEX5N. But so much more usable, the dials and menus work vastly better. Wonderful usability compared to irritating NEX5N..

Couldn't fit my old Canon FDs, no time to fiddle with adapters, but look forward to that. And couldn't work out how to get the manual focus-assist to zoom in.

I now need to figure out what native lens to get. Probably I'll just get the kit lens but wondering about the 35mm. I am surfing Flickr obsessively looking at how different lenses perform - even the 28-70 does good landscape shots, as does the Canon FD 24 2.8, which I already have, and the 50 1.4 seems great for street photography and portraits.

Thanks everyone for your advice and insight. You've really made my decision much easier.

Search

Step up to FF: Sony A7 or Canon 6D?

Pressure

Member

James Larsen

Senior Member

Pressure

Member

James Larsen

Senior Member

Limburger

Veteran Member

beagle1

Forum Pro

Pressure

Member

golfhov

Forum Pro

Pressure

Member

golfhov

Forum Pro

Pressure

Member

Keyboard shortcuts