SL2 as third body travel camera?

MikeJ9116 wrote:

MAC wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

MAC wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

MAC wrote:

• The MikeJ9116 wrote:

MAC wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

MAC wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

refrax wrote:

MikeJ9116 wrote:

I am looking at the SL2, T7i and 77D as a nearly full time replacement for the M3 I have been gimping along with for two years. I thought the SL2 was a slam dunk decision but after checking out the T7i I am undecided between the two. The 77D is off the table for now as I don't see the extra dial and a couple of buttons are worth the price increase. The reason the T7i is appealing over the SL2 is its much deeper shot buffer (~24 versus 6 for the SL2) and its big improvement in auto focus. The T7i isn't a much bigger, or heavier, camera and you get some nice performance bumps for the extra cost. I will decide once I can handle both but my gut tells me the T7i is what I will end up buying.

Just wondering....which one did you end up with, SL2 or T7i?

I have an SL1 and really like the new features that have but put into the SL2 so I'm seriously thinking of upgrading. I am undecided whether the T7i may be the better way to go. Only negative I find with the T7i versus the SL2 is the viewfinder magnification is just slightly lower than that of the SL2.

I am still on the fence. After handling both of them I think the SL2 might have an edge over the T7i. Its viewfinder is a good bit brighter and slightly larger than the T7i which surprised me. Also, I rarely use the burst feature for more than 2-3 shots so that has become less important. While the SL2 has a less robust AF system what it has does have focuses extremely fast. One other thing the SL2 has is a silent shutter (not silent but less noisy) option similar to the 6D. I have a 6D and really like, and use, this feature a lot. The T7i doesn't have a silent shutter option.

Plus, with the $200 savings of the SL2 I can add a few dollars to it and get the EF-S 10-18mm wide angle zoom which I really would like to have for shooting stills and for video. Also, I agree with you regarding the viewfinder being better on the SL2 and this is weighing heavily in my decision. While it might seem like a small thing it is something that can benefit me for nearly every photo I take and as I have gotten older this is something I need to consider. I think the SL2 fitted with the Canon eyepiece extender would provide a really good viewfinder for a person who shoots while wearing glasses like I do.

I have a vacation coming up so I will need to make a decision and buy something next week. If I had to make a choice right now it would be the SL2.

I have T7i and SL1 and 7d2

not only get the 10-18 stm, get the 55-250stm.

I have had the EF-S 55-250mm STM for quite a while that I use on the M3. It might be the best bang for the buck lens I have ever owned considering I bought it for $125.

i got mine for $170 as a kit when I bought my SL1 - great value

Also a 24 stm pancake

the 35 f2 IS is the best indoor portrait lens for crop - better than a 50 stm on 6d

After the 10-18mm I might buy the 35mm macro but I don't want to go too far until I know what my next FF camera will be.

I use 100L for macro and portraits

The 35 F2 IS on APS-C for me was a must portrait lens and since it is sharp at f2.2 and even f2. With my FF and the 50 mm primes that cost $500 or les I had to stop down to f2.8 to be as sharp and they didn't have IS or as good as bokeh

with the spread of AF points on my APS-C cameras I don't have to recompose at the rule of thirds and the 6d would have to use recompose

therefore imo it is a more value based shallow dof for candids and I got the stop of light back by using F2-f2.2

I have a 6D so I am not worried about portrait shooting with the SL2.

I treat my SL1 as a backup or 3rd camera I carry to events

the T7i is my travel camera

the 7d2 with my 35 f2 IS and joystick and 63 focus points is my go to portrait lens, better than my former 5d with 50mm lens

at the digital picture site you can see where my setup is sharper wide open than the 1ds3 FF setup

If it isn't Canon then I will eventually migrate to the new brand's APS-C cameras for compatibility reasons.

Canon has best APS-C system

it is value based FF that they don't use better judgement

I have the EF-S 17-55mm lens

not a lens I'd buy- too heavy- older IS- some sucked dust - some telescoped- not as sharp as my primes

I have had this lens since it came out. Not had any dust issues ever. I find the copy I have to be decently sharp. Sharp enough that having the EF-S 24mm is somewhat redundant considering they both shoot at f/2.8.

heavy - and not as sharp

id rather carry two small primes and both my SL1 and T7i

The reason there are so many lenses is to serve everyone's differing needs. The 17-55mm has taken many sharp, excellent photos for me over the years.

most folks I know who went from APS-C to FF sold theirs. It wasn't worth $830 for a heavy 3 stop IS full frame equivalent of a 27-88 f4.5 that doesn't work on FF

I have always had a Canon ASP-C camera lying around since my 300D days and I probably always will so the 17-55mm serves a purpose.

i go back to d30

so the 24mm pancake isn't one I need at this point. I would probably buy the 40mm pancake before it so I can use it on the 6D I own.

the 24 stm is sharper than the 40

As I said, the 40mm will also work on my 6D where the 24mm will not.

no IS, not as sharp as the 35 f2 IS, and only center point worth focus reliability on 6d

my T7i has better focus

To each his own. The 6D's focus has never been an issue for me. It gives me tack sharp photos shot after shot.

i had 5d for 5 years with center point. My 100L worked nicely on it. But I could never get a 50 to work sharply on it with shallow dof because of the limitation of center point for composition and the issues with the lower cost 50 mm lenses

I don't use the 50mm STM on it much because it just ins't all that good on the 6D.

agree

the 35 f2 IS is better and works on both formats

I don't use primes to a large extent so the 40mm hits the sweet spot for me considering cost and performance.

i have the 50 stm which is better

I have the 50mm STM too. It isn't without its quirks. Especially wide open. The 40mm looks to be less quirky based on the photos I have seen from it.

At f2.8 the 50 stm is very good. It also ressolves better than the 40mm on modern canon bodies

I prefer the reach of 40mm a little better. Plus, it works better on my M3 as it is more compact. It is sort of like a big brother to the EF-M 22mm.

40 is the companion to the 24, but 24 is better

I have a 22mm for the M3 so a 24mm is redundant and not any better as the 22mm is a sharp f/2.0

nice lens and light but rebel system is more capable for events and glass system for canons mirrorless not developed yet

reason i bought SL1- works with my Odins and native glass

someday I hope to buy a FF when Canon has a capable focus system, dual slots, sufficient DR at a reasonable cost

the two lenses I would for sure buy for FF would be the 16-35 IS and the 8-15 FE - I love wide

the lenses that canon needs are a 50 IS and an 85 IS and a 135 IS

until then, I'll stay with my three APS-C cameras

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=824&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=989&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=1

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=989&Camera=963&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=810&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=398&Camera=963&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=824&Sample=0&CameraComp=963&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0