How much low light benefit is there to a Canon 6D vs 50D or SL-1: I do a lot of photography in low light. As expected, noise is my nemesis. I'm thinking of getting a 6D for low light...

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

I do a lot of photography in low light. As expected, noise is my nemesis. I'm thinking of getting a 6D for low light (and probably more general work, as well). How much noise reduction can I really expect. The larger pixels and larger optics to fill them say I should expect a good improvement, and reviews seem to bear this out. But how visible should I expect the differences to be?

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

What lenses do you have?

haroldross Loc: Walthill, Nebraska

My experience is this- there is a tremendous difference between the Canon T1i and T2i (cameras I owned) and the 6D. I felt that noise because an issue for me at ISO 400-800 on the Canon Rebels and starting at ISO 1600 on the 6D. That being said, I have discovered that the noise in the 6D cleans up very well without destroying a lot of detail. I usually process the RAW files through ACR in PhotoShop.

The Canon SL-1 is newer technology so it may be a bit better that the T1i or T2i, but I have not used the SL-1.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

rocketride wrote:

I do a lot of photography in low light. As expected, noise is my nemesis. I'm thinking of getting a 6D for low light (and probably more general work, as well). How much noise reduction can I really expect. The larger pixels and larger optics to fill them say I should expect a good improvement, and reviews seem to bear this out. But how visible should I expect the differences to be?

The 6D is lab tested to ISO 2340 before digital noise becomes evident, very good rating for a Canon. The 50D is only rated at 696 ISO. I was unable to come up with an independant result for the SL1 anywhere, but since it has the same sensor as the 350D Rebel (I think) the rating is likely the same at 637 ISO.

doduce Loc: Holly Springs NC

MT Shooter wrote:

The 6D is lab tested to ISO 2340 before digital noise becomes evident, very good rating for a Canon. The 50D is only rated at 696 ISO. I was unable to come up with an independant result for the SL1 anywhere, but since it has the same sensor as the 350D Rebel (I think) the rating is likely the same at 637 ISO.

I love data. Brings such clarity. :thumbup:

hpl575 Loc: Indianapolis, IN

I have owned a 6d for a little over a year. My experience is the iso performance is much better than Canon crop models I've used, T2i and M. Also, the ability of the 6d auto focus, at least the center point, is much better at low light. The attached photo was taken at iso 10,000. There was a fair amount of tweaking of the raw file in LR. Added note, the site seems to reduce the resolution and increase the compression noise, the original jpeg is very sharp, live and learn.

6d, 70-300L@300, 1/320sec, f18, 10,000iso

hpl575 Loc: Indianapolis, IN

Here is crop of the photo above, cropped and exported at 400x600 in LR, hopefully this is a better sample

Same photo cropped and export at 400x600

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

Cdouthitt wrote:

What lenses do you have?

EF compatible lenses:
35mm f/2 (not the new IS version)
50mm f/1.8 II
50mm f/2.5 Macro with 1:1 adapter
85mm f/1.8
70-300 f/4-5.6, IIRC Sigma IS
200-400 f/5.6 Tamron (quite old)

Bundle I'm contemplating has 24-105 f/4 L.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

rocketride wrote:

EF compatible lenses:
35mm f/2 (not the new IS version)
50mm f/1.8 II
50mm f/2.5 Macro with 1:1 adapter
85mm f/1.8
70-300 f/4-5.6, IIRC Sigma IS
200-400 f/5.6 Tamron (quite old)

Bundle I'm contemplating has 24-105 f/4 L.

Thanks, I was just making sure you weren't trying to use slow glass and shoot low light. Then yes the body upgrade is your next obvious decision to make.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Take his blog with a grain of salt, but if you can afford the 6d, it sounds like a really nice body to match your lenses.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/6d/vs-5d-mark-iii.htm

amehta Loc: Boston

rocketride wrote:

I do a lot of photography in low light. As expected, noise is my nemesis. I'm thinking of getting a 6D for low light (and probably more general work, as well). How much noise reduction can I really expect. The larger pixels and larger optics to fill them say I should expect a good improvement, and reviews seem to bear this out. But how visible should I expect the differences to be?

I agree that a two stop improvement is a realistic improvement. The question is whether that will make or break your shots? When I shoot indoor volleyball, those two stops, plus improving the lenses from the consumer zoom to the pro f/2.8 zoom, gave me a four stop improvement, with shutter speeds going from 1/30 to 1/500, which is huge for stopping the action. I don't know how common it is for a certain type of shot to be so significantly impacted by the abilities of the equipment.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

amehta wrote:

I agree that a two stop improvement is a realistic improvement. The question is whether that will make or break your shots? When I shoot indoor volleyball, those two stops, plus improving the lenses from the consumer zoom to the pro f/2.8 zoom, gave me a four stop improvement, with shutter speeds going from 1/30 to 1/500, which is huge for stopping the action. I don't know how common it is for a certain type of shot to be so significantly impacted by the abilities of the equipment.

The main justification for buying it is for "shooting" folk musicians (my girlfriend is one) and similar performers. in the sort of "divey" illumination that they tend to perform in.
I do a lot of other low-light work, too. "Fire dancers" at SCA events, twilight landscapes and the like.
I've been shooting with three crop sensor bodies-- a 50D, a T4i, and a SL1. And I've been quite happy with all of them in most situations. In good light, I've really never been tempted to go full-frame. In low light, I do see the difference between my photos and those taken with full-frame sensors, but those photos I was comparing with were taken with 1 and 5D series bodies or Nikons.

Thanks, guys. I just placed the order through Amazon. It should arrive on Wednesday.

rocketride Loc: Upstate NY

MT Shooter wrote:

The 6D is lab tested to ISO 2340 before digital noise becomes evident, very good rating for a Canon. The 50D is only rated at 696 ISO. I was unable to come up with an independant result for the SL1 anywhere, but since it has the same sensor as the 350D Rebel (I think) the rating is likely the same at 637 ISO.

It has the same sensor as the T4i & T5i

tbissonn Loc: Boston

I recently bought the Canon 6d. Upgraded from the 60d. I just returned from a trip to Myanmar (Burma) where the low light function of this body was invaluable. Spent a great deal of time in many stupas, temples and pagodas. Always low light situations. The camera functioned incredibly. I would not hesitate. My lens was a canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 and a 50mm f1.4. Shot all photos in raw format. Camera functioned extremely well.

tbissonn Loc: Boston

I recently bought the Canon 6d. Upgraded from the 60d. I just returned from a trip to Myanmar (Burma) where the low light function of this body was invaluable. Spent a great deal of time in many stupas, temples and pagodas. Always low light situations. The camera functioned incredibly. I would not hesitate. My lens was a canon 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 and a 50mm f1.4. Shot all photos in raw format. Camera functioned extremely well.