DrJ

I have 4 old Canon ASP-C bodies and 3 mirrorless bodies. My go-to equipment is an original Canon 7D, and a SONY NEX-7 mirrorless when I want to travel light. I have many good Canon EF lenses and the SONY 18-55 and 55-210 consumer lenses. I have an extensive collection of excellent legacy prime MF enses which I use extensively on mirrorless bodies, and sometimes on the Canon 7D. I shoot sports, still life, portraits, trees, landscapes and people at parties. With 4 graduations and associated parties coming up, I can sort of justify a new body. I'm considering the Canon 6D full frame, despite the fact that it is >4.5 year old technology. Best Buy had a $999 sale and I went with some of my best Canon EF lenses [200/2.8L, 40/2.8 pancake] to compare the 6D to my old Canon 7D. Alas, they did not have a 6D on display. I compared the newer Canon 6D Mk II to my 7D at normal and low light while shooting jpegs. The 6D Mk II was a tad better than the 7D at low ISO but was more noticeably superior in low light at ISO 6400. However, the comparison was not ideal in the store and the difference didn't blow me away. Can anyone provide insights on how much better the IQ will be with the original 6D vs original 7D? Is there a similar quality option in this $1000 price range that I may have missed? I read the dpreview articles. My back-up choice would be the SONY a6500, but I've not been impressed with the reviews of SONY and Zeiss e-mount lenses and might have to settle for the SONY 18-100 lens, which is another $400+. Advice appreciated. DrJ

anotherview Loc: California

This review may help you decide: https://kenrockwell.com/canon/6d-mk-ii.htm

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Canon 6D is a great camera for everything you do other than sports.... but hey, that is where your 7D comes in. Wonderful camera, great ISO performance and great color rendition. I had a 6D right up until I purchased the 5DIV, I never felt the need to purchase the 5DIII while owning the 6D but the upgrades of the 5DIV were significant enough to let me get rid of my 7DII and my 6D and just go with one body. I really felt that I was replacing my 7DII more so than my 6D when I made that move.

jayluber Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Check out my Milky Way photos with my 6D and 77d. Just picked up a used 6D and the technology on the 77D is centuries ahead. But the 6D is perfect for what I want it for: landscape and Astro.

Chefneil

I had a 7d but had the burning desire(read GAS) to try a FF. I sold the 7d and got the 6d. (Byw, I really liked the 7d, but it was getting a little long in the tooth)Then realized I missed the reach of a crop. Ooops. So I decided to keep the 6d and get a 70d. (All refurbished)
No regrets! I love the the IQ of the 6d for the “studio” and the reach and FPS of the 70d.

olc.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

The 6D (or 6D MKII) is about 2 stops better than the 7D in low light, which is significant. The 6D will produce good results at ISO 12,800 while the 7D begins to get noticeably noisey to me at anything beyond ISO 3,200, and I tried to stay at ISO 1600 or below when I had one. Btw, the 7D MKII is improved, but still a stop worse than the 6D in low light. It does however. Have a much higher frame rate and significantly better AF system than the 6D. For low light where fast action is not important (such as landscapes, portraits, etc.), i’d choose the 6D, but for sports, BIF or other action photography, i’d Be looking at a 7D2 or used 5D3.

BebuLamar

It would be hard to compare because the 6D is FF and the 7D is APS-C. Using same lens the image are different. Using different lens to provide same view then how can we be sure the quality of the lenses are the same.

Selene03

The 6d is an absolutely wonderful camera. You will enjoy the full frame experience and things the 6d does well, it does very well (can get focus in very low light, has wonderful noise control, is very light weight). I upgraded to the 5d mk iv for AF and buffer, but the 6d is still a wonderful camera.

DrJ

Thanks TriX. My experience with the 7D above ISO 3200 is consistent with yours. I've used ISO 6400 indoors when there was no alternative and results were not good enough. DrJ

DrJ

I realize that my comparison was far from ideal. I would probably buy the 6D MkII for $998 but that is not an option ! DrJ

jayluber Loc: Phoenix, AZ

I would too!

DrJ

Good review of both the 6D and 6D Mk II. Ken Rockwell likes the Mk II better than does dpreview. DrJ

DrJ

Blurryeyed: Thanks for the helpful comments. I have considered a used Canon 5D Mk III but they typically cost several hundred dollars more on ebay than the new Canon 6D. I probably would pefer the 5D Mk III for the 1/8000 s shutter speed. I'd love a 5D MkIV but can't justify the ~$3200.

DrJ

jayluber: I know a Jay Luber from parties at Dewey Beach.....could it be? Back to cameras. You might find it interesting that the Canon specailist at a local camera shop was loaned a Canon 80D by Canon and he absolutely raves about it. DrJ

DrJ

Chefneil: I suffer from LBA--lens buying addiction-- and have a roomful of wonderful MF lenses. Yeah, I do need another camera body. DrJ