Upgrading from a Rebel T3i to T6s~Upgrade the lens? Wildlife shooting is the goal.

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife.  I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s.  I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels.  So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens?  I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots.  In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities.  With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm.  But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens?  Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Thank you and Happy New Year!

We shoot about the same type of subjects and I also have a T6s, although I upgraded from a Rebel Xti. From 10 to 24 megapixels the difference is huge, likely not so much from 18 to 24. But anyway, I use a 10-18 for wide-angle so your 10-22 should be fine. Now about the long range, I use a 70-200 F4L IS and it is stunning on 24 Mp so the 70-300 L should be the same. What I would suggest however is not to update your lens until you have a chance to try it on the T6s, it might surprise you. If after testing you find out that the lens is limiting the combo in terms of resolution, then upgrade. If there is no chance to test it, go for it and Just remember the the 70-300 L is a noticeably heavier and larger lens. Good luck.

Happy New Year.

Francisco Miranda wrote:

We shoot about the same type of subjects and I also have a T6s, although I upgraded from a Rebel Xti. From 10 to 24 megapixels the difference is huge, likely not so much from 18 to 24. But anyway, I use a 10-18 for wide-angle so your 10-22 should be fine. Now about the long range, I use a 70-200 F4L IS and it is stunning on 24 Mp so the 70-300 L should be the same. What I would suggest however is not to update your lens until you have a chance to try it on the T6s, it might surprise you. If after testing you find out that the lens is limiting the combo in terms of resolution, then upgrade. If there is no chance to test it, go for it and Just remember the the 70-300 L is a noticeably heavier and larger lens. Good luck.

Happy New Year.

Thank you for the advice. I knew the L was heavier, but I didn't count on it being noticeably heavier. That's a major consideration since I'm a smaller person in my late 50's. Yes, I agree with testing my current lens first. Have you heard anything about the new 70-300 II that came out last month?
Mary
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world . . ." Margaret Mead

Digirame wrote:

There's so many different combinations of cameras and lenses to choose for wildlife. I'm using a Canon T3i (600D) camera with a Tamron 150-600mm G1 lens. I'm looking to upgrade my camera, but I hesitate a little because the 18mp Canon T3i still does a good job. Here's a photo I got yesterday at 552mm focal length. The more focal length, the better. I say that because I still find myself often cropping the images to get closer.

This is a male wood duck taken under cloudy skies in the Portland, Oregon area.

And yes...Happy New Year.

That wood duck photo is spectacular!  I agree the T3i is a good camera and I hate to let it go.  In fact, I'm considering using the T3i with the landscape lens and using the new camera with the zoom.  That way I don't have to change lenses, which can be inconvenient when time is of the essence.  I've heard good things about your Tamron lens.  I try to avoid that heft, but it obviously takes excellent photos.

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities.
With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Well, would you want/need another lens, sounds more of a question to ask. The newer sensor will give more MP (megapixels) and better noise ratios in lower light. Is that enough to 'crop more'?
Perhaps a bit, but I'd expect not much. Also in cropping all imperfections will be more visible. This might be lens flaws, but I'd expect other imperfections (like focus or camera shake or subject shake) to pop up first. These can be worked at, improving skills.

All-n-all I would not expect too much from 'cropping more'.

The fact that you are happy with the results of your lenses ('some nice wildlife shots') makes me thinking to advise you to be reluctant in buying an other lens. And if you'd go for an upgrade, then the question is what for? more reach? more IQ? Better IS? faster aperture? For birding lenses reaching to at least 400mm or more are desirable.

On keeping your other body: I am very happy to be able to carry two bodies, each with another lens. Very handy and fast when the situation asks for it.

And do consider weight of equipment when walking with your lenses.

AdriaanMeijer wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities.
With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Well, would you want/need another lens, sounds more of a question to ask. The newer sensor will give more MP (megapixels) and better noise ratios in lower light. Is that enough to 'crop more'?
Perhaps a bit, but I'd expect not much. Also in cropping all imperfections will be more visible. This might be lens flaws, but I'd expect other imperfections (like focus or camera shake or subject shake) to pop up first. These can be worked at, improving skills.

All-n-all I would not expect too much from 'cropping more'.

The fact that you are happy with the results of your lenses ('some nice wildlife shots') makes me thinking to advise you to be reluctant in buying an other lens. And if you'd go for an upgrade, then the question is what for? more reach? more IQ? Better IS? faster aperture? For birding lenses reaching to at least 400mm or more are desirable.

On keeping your other body: I am very happy to be able to carry two bodies, each with another lens. Very handy and fast when the situation asks for it.

And do consider weight of equipment when walking with your lenses.

Adriana,

Thank you for the clear and witty response.  Why would I change lenses? For a better keep ratio.  I know 400 is better for  BIF.  But, I'm too constricted when carrying big lenses. So, I count on megapixels. I hear you saying megapixels aren't necessarily the answer. That's why one of my considerations is looking at the non-L new 70-300 lens. I think is has an improved IS, and it is not as heavy as the L. The ideal would be a light 2.8 400 mm with IS,  but that hasn't been invented yet. I'm glad to hear your comments on dual body. I think a Rick Steves day pack will help with the added weight. I'm actually very excited by the prospect of not having to change lenses in a pinch.   Any thoughts on the 70-300 II?  Thanks again. 
Mary
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world . . ." Margaret Mead

SeeTheWorld wrote:

AdriaanMeijer wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities.
With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Well, would you want/need another lens, sounds more of a question to ask. The newer sensor will give more MP (megapixels) and better noise ratios in lower light. Is that enough to 'crop more'?
Perhaps a bit, but I'd expect not much. Also in cropping all imperfections will be more visible. This might be lens flaws, but I'd expect other imperfections (like focus or camera shake or subject shake) to pop up first. These can be worked at, improving skills.

All-n-all I would not expect too much from 'cropping more'.

The fact that you are happy with the results of your lenses ('some nice wildlife shots') makes me thinking to advise you to be reluctant in buying an other lens. And if you'd go for an upgrade, then the question is what for? more reach? more IQ? Better IS? faster aperture? For birding lenses reaching to at least 400mm or more are desirable.

On keeping your other body: I am very happy to be able to carry two bodies, each with another lens. Very handy and fast when the situation asks for it.

And do consider weight of equipment when walking with your lenses.

Adriana,

Thank you for the clear and witty response. Why would I change lenses? For a better keep ratio. I know 400 is better for BIF. But, I'm too constricted when carrying big lenses. So, I count on megapixels. I hear you saying megapixels aren't necessarily the answer. That's why one of my considerations is looking at the non-L new 70-300 lens. I think is has an improved IS, and it is not as heavy as the L. The ideal would be a light 2.8 400 mm with IS, but that hasn't been invented yet. I'm glad to hear your comments on dual body. I think a Rick Steves day pack will help with the added weight. I'm actually very excited by the prospect of not having to change lenses in a pinch. Any thoughts on the 70-300 II? Thanks again.
Mary
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world . . ." Margaret Mead

Sorry Adriaan.  Spell check mangeled your name.

You are welcome, that is what I would do myself. Regarding the weight, "noticeably heavier" is something kind of subjective so to be more precise the weight listed for the non-L (I am not totally sure this is your lens but gives an idea) is 630 grams and 1050 grams for the L. This is about a full pound difference, a lot for some not so much for others. About the new one, I've heard about it but haven't seen any tests so far. But as it is so new, I would say we cannot conclude in the very short term how better it is relative to the one you have. In reality, I don't have any experience with the 70-300s as I am happy with the 70-200 and for me the natural progression would be the newer 100-400L (again noticeably heavier).

SeeTheWorld wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

AdriaanMeijer wrote:

(...)
The fact that you are happy with the results of your lenses ('some nice wildlife shots') makes me thinking to advise you to be reluctant in buying an other lens. And if you'd go for an upgrade, then the question is what for? more reach? more IQ? Better IS? faster aperture? For birding lenses reaching to at least 400mm or more are desirable.

(...)
And do consider weight of equipment when walking with your lenses.

Adriana,

Thank you for the clear and witty response. Why would I change lenses? For a better keep ratio. I know 400 is better for BIF. But, I'm too constricted when carrying big lenses. So, I count on megapixels. I hear you saying megapixels aren't necessarily the answer. That's why one of my considerations is looking at the non-L new 70-300 lens. I think is has an improved IS, and it is not as heavy as the L. The ideal would be a light 2.8 400 mm with IS, but that hasn't been invented yet. I'm glad to hear your comments on dual body. I think a Rick Steves day pack will help with the added weight. I'm actually very excited by the prospect of not having to change lenses in a pinch. Any thoughts on the 70-300 II? Thanks again.

I haven't done enough research on these lenses to give reasonable advise. Do some research yourself. A place to start is 'better keep ratio'. Do investigate what went wrong with the non keepers. That's the problem to tackle.
I did give the list of questions for a reason.

Mary
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world . . ." Margaret Mead

Sorry Adriaan. Spell check mangeled your name.

is okay. I tend to sign mails with Adriana time and again.

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities. With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Thank you and Happy New Year!

As someone who went the rebel upgrade pathway from the 12mp T3 to 18mp T5i to 24mp T6s, I can tell you, it's not much of a difference in real life actual end results of image quality. All these cameras priduce sharp, detailed pictures I can crop in. The T3 is a bit less but the difference between 18mp and 24mp is simply invisible to me. You'll be disappointed if upgrading for that reason.

In fact, all my upgrades are disappointing and I ended up with 3 cameras that are identical with some tweaks here and there, it's the lens in front of them that CHANGES the image.

For a Body upgrade I only found the 70D (and 80D) to be the impressive jumps. Thess bodies are extraordinary. Perfect size, more substantial, more rugged and reassuring, more ergonomic, faster and snappier, perfect body between huge 5D/7D shells and rebel plastic shells, and it's not really that heavier that the rebels.

1- So I do not advice upgrading from a rebel to a rebel.

2- Unless you want a B-camera: then get the cheapest rebel because they really are the same. A great deal on a T5/6 or T5i as a second body is best.

3- If you'll spend for an ''upgrade", go for a 70D/80D to feel the jump.

You have a t3i which is as good as rebels/IQ gets, and have the landscape end covered with the great 11-22mm.

IMHO you just need a new Tele for wildlife.

The old 70-300mm you've got is one of my least favourite lenses, image sharpness and quality at 300mm looking 1:1 are just never satisfactory.

My newly found tele is the smart 55-250mm STM version. Which performs in sharpness identically to the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II!! It's a freaking SHARP little lens and trumps the 70-300mm on a rebel, more cropability and nicer image and HUGE weight reduction from more than 700 grams to about 350, because it's made to only cover your sensor, not a FF one you don't use. Hence they can make the tele smaller and sharper.

I suggest getting that lens swapping the 70-300. That will make a bigger difference than a t6s. You'll find sharper, steadier, higher quality telephoto shots satisfactory at 1:1 viewing and cropping.

And the t6s is getting a replacement about this month with a t7s 24mp Dual Pixel AF sensor which at least warrants an upgrade for high dynamic range of the 80D sensor at least, an IQ improvement for landscape photography that can be seen in REAL LIFE.

After the 55-250mm came to the country, All my wildlife and sports photographers friends are using the 7D Mark II + 55-250mm combo. And those who do lowlight have the 7D Mark II + 70-200mm f/2.8 IS combo.

So a new tele? a 55-250mm STM IS.

A second body? a great deal on a T5/T5i to put the tele on and keep the wide on the t3i.

Want a BODY UPGRADE to feel and see? 70D deal. Or wait for the t7s.

That's my advice and it comes from lots of money lost in FF lenses and rebels.

(The newest 70-300mm IS II tele is probably great too but again you pay and carry FF circle while there's a small one available for you at half the weight and cost)

Currently I use a 5d3 mostly for landscape and the 7d2 for birds and other wildlife.  Having two bodies eliminates a lot of screwing around switching out lenses.  My T3i is now being enjoyed by my son-in-law who very much appreciated the hand me down,

I've been to Yellowstone twice in recent years.  Beautiful park!  I used my 300mm f4L for wildlife there but wished for more reach.  Last summer I purchased the 100-400 II.  It is a stunningly sharp lens with a short minimum focusing distance.  That lens pretty much stays on the 7d2.

Whatever you decide, enjoy your trip.  And keeping two bodies is the way to go.

You wont see much, if any improvement in image quality going from a T3i to a T6. The only thing you will gain is features that you may or may not find useful.

Agree that the 55-250 is great value. About two years back, my son and I had the opportunity for a Kenyan safari. I loaned him my T2i + 55-250mm, and I used a 6D with a 70-200 2.8. I was quite surprised to find that, maybe, 85% of the images were indistinguishable between the two systems.

There are lots of caveats in my observation: rarely low-light circumstances, etc. So, while I'm probably overly fond of my 6D, the T2i was clearly capable of capturing impressive images using the 55-250mm.

I have recently bought the T6s & 55-250mm IS STM lens which I personally love. Weight and size is a big factor for me too, and the 55-250mm definitely fits the bill. If you woukd like to get serious about wildlife, you'll eventually have to accept that the bigger and heavier lenses coupled with the faster bodies with higher burst rates will give you a more successful hit rate.

Having said that, one needs to draw the line somewhere in terms of budget and weight. I believe the 70-300L would make you a lot happier when shooting, so if you can afford it, maybe go for it and accept that it'll be significantly heavier (at least it isn't the heaviest out there!). Perhaps try renting one out to try before you buy? One suggestion I have that hasn't been mentioned is the 70-300mm DO, seems to be on the smaller side wth some excellent reviews: https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B0001G8VFO/ref=mp_s_a_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1483561821&sr=8-9&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=canon+70-300

Another idea- have you thought of getting a used 7D? I've seen them going at good prices on eBay recently.

Happy new year!

1. Digirame wrote:

I have been using multiple cameras with attached lenses for about six years. It works very well when using side bags. I can pull them out very quickly. So what you write has merit for us that choose to do it that way.

If you considered one of the Sigma or Tamron 150-600mm telephoto lenses you might be a little surprised at how easy they are to use, once they are handled properly. At first my hands and wrists were a little sore when I started using it for a couple of hours. Then I learned to cradle the lens and camera until I was ready to take some handheld pictures. Now it's easy and I never get sore. Some people also use monopods or tripods so the weight issue isn't as great on their hands.

I think when I eventually jump to a 24 megapixel camera from a 18 megapixel camera, it won't be that much of a notice (in terms of resolution for cropping to get closer). But when I jumped from my Canon 55-250mm IS lens to the Tamron 150-600mm lens it was a huge difference at the long end. I'm still planning to upgrade my 18 megapixel cameras, but I have been slow doing it. It would be neat having 24 megapixels and better high ISO performance etc., but (in my opinion) the huge telephoto lens is what can propel us quickly into the big leagues (much more than going from 18 to 24 megapixels for wildlife pictures).

Here's another photo from Friday, December 30th. I was lucky to get these because we have had lately so much clouds, fog, rain and snow in the Portland, Oregon area.

This is a female Hooded Merganser. I cropped it slightly for composition and to get a little closer. I could crop it a lot more and still retain the details. But I liked the water surface too. It's one of my favorites with the reflection. At this time of year the sun is very low in the horizon, so the light shines on the side of the bird instead from above (like in the summer).

Happy New Year again.

Hi again,

I really like your way of thinking with longer zooms making a huge difference.  This is a great photo, and the water is nice too.  You must have great access to ducks.  Thanks for the input!

Ebrahim Saadawi wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities. With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Thank you and Happy New Year!

As someone who went the rebel upgrade pathway from the 12mp T3 to 18mp T5i to 24mp T6s, I can tell you, it's not much of a difference in real life actual end results of image quality. All these cameras priduce sharp, detailed pictures I can crop in. The T3 is a bit less but the difference between 18mp and 24mp is simply invisible to me. You'll be disappointed if upgrading for that reason.

In fact, all my upgrades are disappointing and I ended up with 3 cameras that are identical with some tweaks here and there, it's the lens in front of them that CHANGES the image.

For a Body upgrade I only found the 70D (and 80D) to be the impressive jumps. Thess bodies are extraordinary. Perfect size, more substantial, more rugged and reassuring, more ergonomic, faster and snappier, perfect body between huge 5D/7D shells and rebel plastic shells, and it's not really that heavier that the rebels.

1- So I do not advice upgrading from a rebel to a rebel.

2- Unless you want a B-camera: then get the cheapest rebel because they really are the same. A great deal on a T5/6 or T5i as a second body is best.

3- If you'll spend for an ''upgrade", go for a 70D/80D to feel the jump.

You have a t3i which is as good as rebels/IQ gets, and have the landscape end covered with the great 11-22mm.

IMHO you just need a new Tele for wildlife.

The old 70-300mm you've got is one of my least favourite lenses, image sharpness and quality at 300mm looking 1:1 are just never satisfactory.

My newly found tele is the smart 55-250mm STM version. Which performs in sharpness identically to the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II!! It's a freaking SHARP little lens and trumps the 70-300mm on a rebel, more cropability and nicer image and HUGE weight reduction from more than 700 grams to about 350, because it's made to only cover your sensor, not a FF one you don't use. Hence they can make the tele smaller and sharper.

I suggest getting that lens swapping the 70-300. That will make a bigger difference than a t6s. You'll find sharper, steadier, higher quality telephoto shots satisfactory at 1:1 viewing and cropping.

And the t6s is getting a replacement about this month with a t7s 24mp Dual Pixel AF sensor which at least warrants an upgrade for high dynamic range of the 80D sensor at least, an IQ improvement for landscape photography that can be seen in REAL LIFE.

After the 55-250mm came to the country, All my wildlife and sports photographers friends are using the 7D Mark II + 55-250mm combo. And those who do lowlight have the 7D Mark II + 70-200mm f/2.8 IS combo.

So a new tele? a 55-250mm STM IS.

A second body? a great deal on a T5/T5i to put the tele on and keep the wide on the t3i.

Want a BODY UPGRADE to feel and see? 70D deal. Or wait for the t7s.

That's my advice and it comes from lots of money lost in FF lenses and rebels.

(The newest 70-300mm IS II tele is probably great too but again you pay and carry FF circle while there's a small one available for you at half the weight and cost)

I will certainly check out that lens.  Your thoughts on the cameras makes good sense too.  I was getting the impression there isn't a notable impact when going to a T6s from T3i.  I need to make certain there's a swivel screen on whichever camera I end up with.  Thank you for sharing your well-considered opinion.

SeeTheWorld wrote:

Ebrahim Saadawi wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities. With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Thank you and Happy New Year!

As someone who went the rebel upgrade pathway from the 12mp T3 to 18mp T5i to 24mp T6s, I can tell you, it's not much of a difference in real life actual end results of image quality. All these cameras priduce sharp, detailed pictures I can crop in. The T3 is a bit less but the difference between 18mp and 24mp is simply invisible to me. You'll be disappointed if upgrading for that reason.

In fact, all my upgrades are disappointing and I ended up with 3 cameras that are identical with some tweaks here and there, it's the lens in front of them that CHANGES the image.

For a Body upgrade I only found the 70D (and 80D) to be the impressive jumps. Thess bodies are extraordinary. Perfect size, more substantial, more rugged and reassuring, more ergonomic, faster and snappier, perfect body between huge 5D/7D shells and rebel plastic shells, and it's not really that heavier that the rebels.

1- So I do not advice upgrading from a rebel to a rebel.

2- Unless you want a B-camera: then get the cheapest rebel because they really are the same. A great deal on a T5/6 or T5i as a second body is best.

3- If you'll spend for an ''upgrade", go for a 70D/80D to feel the jump.

You have a t3i which is as good as rebels/IQ gets, and have the landscape end covered with the great 11-22mm.

IMHO you just need a new Tele for wildlife.

The old 70-300mm you've got is one of my least favourite lenses, image sharpness and quality at 300mm looking 1:1 are just never satisfactory.

My newly found tele is the smart 55-250mm STM version. Which performs in sharpness identically to the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II!! It's a freaking SHARP little lens and trumps the 70-300mm on a rebel, more cropability and nicer image and HUGE weight reduction from more than 700 grams to about 350, because it's made to only cover your sensor, not a FF one you don't use. Hence they can make the tele smaller and sharper.

I suggest getting that lens swapping the 70-300. That will make a bigger difference than a t6s. You'll find sharper, steadier, higher quality telephoto shots satisfactory at 1:1 viewing and cropping.

And the t6s is getting a replacement about this month with a t7s 24mp Dual Pixel AF sensor which at least warrants an upgrade for high dynamic range of the 80D sensor at least, an IQ improvement for landscape photography that can be seen in REAL LIFE.

After the 55-250mm came to the country, All my wildlife and sports photographers friends are using the 7D Mark II + 55-250mm combo. And those who do lowlight have the 7D Mark II + 70-200mm f/2.8 IS combo.

So a new tele? a 55-250mm STM IS.

A second body? a great deal on a T5/T5i to put the tele on and keep the wide on the t3i.

Want a BODY UPGRADE to feel and see? 70D deal. Or wait for the t7s.

That's my advice and it comes from lots of money lost in FF lenses and rebels.

(The newest 70-300mm IS II tele is probably great too but again you pay and carry FF circle while there's a small one available for you at half the weight and cost)

I will certainly check out that lens. Your thoughts on the cameras makes good sense too. I was getting the impression there isn't a notable impact when going to a T6s from T3i. I need to make certain there's a swivel screen on whichever camera I end up with. Thank you for sharing your well-considered opinion.

The impact can be quite noticeable, but it depends upon what weaknesses you find with your current kit. For example:

• AF flexibility is substantially better going to the T6i/s than in previous generations (it is essentially the same module as the 7D).
• If you're lens-limited, the 33% difference in resolution won't be noticeable, but if you are sensor limited it probably will be.
• You will get somewhat better low-light and dynamic range performance, but again, unless you were pushing the limits on your T3i, you probably won't notice.
• On the T6s, you also get the secondary control dial, which can help with quick adjustments.

If none of these are impacting your current usage, then the incremental upgrades may be far outweighed by just getting better glass.

On the other hand, the T3i is probably getting a bit "long in tooth", and failure is always an option that becomes more likely as time goes by. So even if you are generally happy with it, an upgrade wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

The timing, however, is a big question mark. There is general consensus that the next generation is right around the corner, and so all of the incremental improvements above are likely to improve again. But will it come in time for your big Yellowstone adventure? Or, as the current generation becomes the "previous" generation, you'll start seeing more sales and be able to get that upgrade from your current state for that much less.

Woody W. wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

Ebrahim Saadawi wrote:

SeeTheWorld wrote:

I'm a hobbyist who shoots landscapes, macro and wildlife. I'm about to upgrade the T3i to T6s. I like the swivel touch-screen and higher megapixels. So the question is, do I also upgrade the lens? I'm planning to keep my 10-22 mm for landscapes, and I have the original 70-300 f4-5.6 mm non-L, which I took to Africa for some nice wildlife shots. In three weeks we head to Yellowstone where I hope to get some great wildlife opportunities. With the higher megapixels of the new camera I'll be able to crop more, so I don't think I need more than a 300 mm. But, would the upgrade in camera warrant an upgrade in lens? Should I also upgrade the 70-300 f4-5.6 lens to the 70-300 f4-5.6 L?

Thank you and Happy New Year!

As someone who went the rebel upgrade pathway from the 12mp T3 to 18mp T5i to 24mp T6s, I can tell you, it's not much of a difference in real life actual end results of image quality. All these cameras priduce sharp, detailed pictures I can crop in. The T3 is a bit less but the difference between 18mp and 24mp is simply invisible to me. You'll be disappointed if upgrading for that reason.

In fact, all my upgrades are disappointing and I ended up with 3 cameras that are identical with some tweaks here and there, it's the lens in front of them that CHANGES the image.

For a Body upgrade I only found the 70D (and 80D) to be the impressive jumps. Thess bodies are extraordinary. Perfect size, more substantial, more rugged and reassuring, more ergonomic, faster and snappier, perfect body between huge 5D/7D shells and rebel plastic shells, and it's not really that heavier that the rebels.

1- So I do not advice upgrading from a rebel to a rebel.

2- Unless you want a B-camera: then get the cheapest rebel because they really are the same. A great deal on a T5/6 or T5i as a second body is best.

3- If you'll spend for an ''upgrade", go for a 70D/80D to feel the jump.

You have a t3i which is as good as rebels/IQ gets, and have the landscape end covered with the great 11-22mm.

IMHO you just need a new Tele for wildlife.

The old 70-300mm you've got is one of my least favourite lenses, image sharpness and quality at 300mm looking 1:1 are just never satisfactory.

My newly found tele is the smart 55-250mm STM version. Which performs in sharpness identically to the 70-200mm 2.8 IS II!! It's a freaking SHARP little lens and trumps the 70-300mm on a rebel, more cropability and nicer image and HUGE weight reduction from more than 700 grams to about 350, because it's made to only cover your sensor, not a FF one you don't use. Hence they can make the tele smaller and sharper.

I suggest getting that lens swapping the 70-300. That will make a bigger difference than a t6s. You'll find sharper, steadier, higher quality telephoto shots satisfactory at 1:1 viewing and cropping.

And the t6s is getting a replacement about this month with a t7s 24mp Dual Pixel AF sensor which at least warrants an upgrade for high dynamic range of the 80D sensor at least, an IQ improvement for landscape photography that can be seen in REAL LIFE.

After the 55-250mm came to the country, All my wildlife and sports photographers friends are using the 7D Mark II + 55-250mm combo. And those who do lowlight have the 7D Mark II + 70-200mm f/2.8 IS combo.

So a new tele? a 55-250mm STM IS.

A second body? a great deal on a T5/T5i to put the tele on and keep the wide on the t3i.

Want a BODY UPGRADE to feel and see? 70D deal. Or wait for the t7s.

That's my advice and it comes from lots of money lost in FF lenses and rebels.

(The newest 70-300mm IS II tele is probably great too but again you pay and carry FF circle while there's a small one available for you at half the weight and cost)

I will certainly check out that lens. Your thoughts on the cameras makes good sense too. I was getting the impression there isn't a notable impact when going to a T6s from T3i. I need to make certain there's a swivel screen on whichever camera I end up with. Thank you for sharing your well-considered opinion.

The impact can be quite noticeable, but it depends upon what weaknesses you find with your current kit. For example:

• AF flexibility is substantially better going to the T6i/s than in previous generations (it is essentially the same module as the 7D).
• If you're lens-limited, the 33% difference in resolution won't be noticeable, but if you are sensor limited it probably will be.
• You will get somewhat better low-light and dynamic range performance, but again, unless you were pushing the limits on your T3i, you probably won't notice.
• On the T6s, you also get the secondary control dial, which can help with quick adjustments.

If none of these are impacting your current usage, then the incremental upgrades may be far outweighed by just getting better glass.

On the other hand, the T3i is probably getting a bit "long in tooth", and failure is always an option that becomes more likely as time goes by. So even if you are generally happy with it, an upgrade wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

The timing, however, is a big question mark. There is general consensus that the next generation is right around the corner, and so all of the incremental improvements above are likely to improve again. But will it come in time for your big Yellowstone adventure? Or, as the current generation becomes the "previous" generation, you'll start seeing more sales and be able to get that upgrade from your current state for that much less.

I hear what you're saying about incremental improvements.  My skills do not push the T3i to existing limits.  Therefore, I chose not to get the T6s and wait to see how little long I can get my existing camera and lenses to work.  Basically, after six months of research I decided to do absolutely nothing to update my current situation.  Instead, I'm practicing doing Custom White Balance quickly and choosing the best way to carry the current equipment.  We have six days until leaving for Yellowstone and I'm charging four batteries since they wear down more quickly in the cold.  I am also bringing my Sony PowerShot in case of emergencies.  It has no real zoom capabilities, but takes great landscape and indoor shots.

Thank you for continuing the discussion.  I've learned from the great input I got from my question. I'm interested to see the next Rebel generation.  When the T3i wears out, I'll make the change.