whlsdn Loc: Colorado

Photocraig, that sounds like wise, practical advice, actually.

To self: Must. Exert. Self. Control. Be sensible. Just enjoy.

We'll see if that worked.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Go with the 5D MII, Keep the 60D as well.
Both very good cameras, yes older but still top notch quality, award winning photos can be taken, if you do your part, with the 5D MII or for that matter the 60D.

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

Just a little tip; get EF lenses for your camera, then you can use them on any of the EOS bodies !

khorinek

I would not buy a used canon mark II for $600. You can get a used canon 6D for about the same price and the 6D is a full frame camera with better ISO capabilities. Maybe save up for the 6D II. I used the Canon 5D II when it came out. I didn't realize how limited it was until I replaced it with the Mark III. Also, ask your friend how many shots he's taken with the camera. If over 150,000 you may be looking at a shutter replacement ($300).

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

These are my personal observations and personal opinions. When a question is asked in this forum the rule is that there will be many different opinions and answers, sometimes or many times confusing for the person asking the question.

In the first place, the Panasonic if you use the 4:3 ratio is a full frame camera. Your 60D, if you use a lens made for the "cropped format" will also use the whole sensor. The quality of your images will depend more on you than on your camera or lens. The best camera and the sharpest lens cannot do the job the photographer cannot do. Do your part and your gear will do its part.

I often read here that the quality of a file from a "full frame" is superior to that of a "cropped sensor." This is not true. Modern APS cameras have great quality and the majority of the lenses available are very capable when it comes to sharpness. Yes, a so called full frame camera will give you an edge when it comes to noise performance but more modern APS sensor cameras are doing so well that the gap is closing. If you shoot in low light all the time and you find yourself using 1600 ISO and above then the "full frame" should be in the list of your priorities.

For wildlife and sports and even for many other applications like landscape and portraits your 60D will do very well. I use Olympus cameras and I am not familiar with Panasonic bodies (I use Panasonic lenses) but as far as I know the AF of the little camera is not as useful or competent as that in your 60D. I do not know how old is your camera and how long have you had the lenses but learning how to use the different features of the camera and getting familiar with the lenses and what they can do should be your most important steps to handle the camera well to come up with better photographs.

The Panasonic is a nice little camera, it is easy to carry, small enough to fit anywhere and from what I know competent enough for great images. I would keep both systems and I will use them accordingly. Going full frame means new expensive lenses and a new investment. Another camera that you will have to learn and as I said it will not change radically your present results. If you have in mind to keep only one camera body the 60D would be my first choice because it is much more versatile than your Panasonic. If you do not want to get rid of the Panasonic keep it because for traveling, hiking and spending many hours shooting the little camera is hard to beat.

As I said these are my personal thoughts. There is always plenty of time to spend hard earned money but the question that you should ask yourself is, will it really make a difference in my photography?
I do not believe it will.

khorinek

A Scott Kelby quote, "never let outdated camera equipment get in the way of allowing you to be the best photographer you can be". www.scottkelby.com

Don, the 2nd son Loc: Crowded Florida

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Sorry, I would only recommend Nikon. Why? Because they are only one of two companies in the world that manufacture their own glass from start to finish. And Canon is not the second.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

What a joke.
PS they are clueless on making the sensor, But I guess that is not part of the calculation.

Dossile

Rook2c4:
“My recommendation:
Stop looking at cameras and lenses as "investments".
They are tools. Either a tool is useful to what you want to do, or it isn't. Buying camera equipment as investment is something collectors do, hoping the value will eventually go up.“

I get the point, but respectfully disagree. Not every investment has money as its reward. I invest in many things that yield no material benefit, but simply create enjoyment or happiness. Taking a great picture falls into that category. I believe purchasing camera equipment can definitely be an investment, as well as a huge waste of money.

In that light, I think you’ll find a full frame camera is a great investment. I have an older model Panasonic 4/3 with the same array of lenses that you have and a full frame Nikon D850. I love both cameras and am seriously thinking about replacing my Panasonic for the better new sensors of the G9 or GX9. Even then, I will undoubtedly still use the full frame D850 2 to 3 times more often than a newer 4/3.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Spoken like someone with an unlimited budget for gear!

If it were me, I'd sell off all the micro 4/3 gear, keep the 60D and maybe add the 5DII. The two Canon cameras can share more than just lenses (batteries, chargers, dedicated flash... yada yada). Depending upon what you shoot, it can be very handy to have an APS-C and a FF camera pair to complement each other and serve different purposes. It "leverages" the lenses they share for various purposes. FOR EXAMPLE... if you shoot sports or wildlife, take the 60D for its "added reach" and faster shooting rate. Or, when shooting landscapes and portraits, use the 5DII. APS-C is great when using longer telephotos... FF is great when using wide angle and looking for strong background blur effects with short telephotos. An 18MP APS-C is more than enough image quality for many uses. A full frame 21MP image might be better when planning to make really big prints.

And in some ways the 1.6X APS-C format Canon uses makes more sense than the 1.5X that other manufacturers use.... But the difference is actually pretty minimal. (One of the reasons that other manufacturers use that format is because they all get most of their sensors from the same place: Sony. On the other hand, Canon has made their own sensors since the early 2000s. This was one of the reasons they were the first to offer full frame and had a four or five year lead using CMOS sensors, which are higher ISO capable than the CCD sensors that all the other manufacturers continued to use for a while. But now everyone has full frame and they all only use CMOS... so the playing field is pretty level.)

The 5DII is a pretty good camera. It's biggest claim to fame is the HD video it offers, which was a major breakthrough for the film industry. Hollywood has done all sorts of innovative things with 5DII... and probably is still using quite a few of them!

The 5DII's biggest weakness is the autofocus system it uses. At first glance, you might think it's AF is the same as the 60D's, but it's not.

The 60D uses a 9-point AF system inherited from 50D and 40D... all 9 points are the better "cross type" and the center one is a further enhanced "diagonal cross type" when used with f/2.8 and faster lenses.

The 5DII also appears to have a 9-point AF system.... But it inherited the original 5D's AF without any improvements.... What you see in the viewfinder are 9 points, with only a single cross-type AF point at the center. The rest of the visible points are single-axis and noticeably lower performance. The 5DII also has 6 invisible "Assist" AF points. They aren't indicated in the viewfinder, but are clustered tight around the center point. Essentially those "hidden" AF points turn the Spot Metering circle area indicated on the focus screen into sort of "one large AF point" (just the opposite of "higher precision" Spot Focus found on later Canon models). If I recall correctly, a couple of those hidden Assist points are also cross-type, but not all of them. Those hidden Assist points can be turned on or off in the menu. But there's a problem: They ONLY work in AI Servo focus mode, intended for moving subjects. And the overall AF system of the 5DII is NOT very good shooting moving subjects. Even when enabled, the Assist points aren't active in One Shot focus mode, used for stationary subjects. The 60D's AF is better... The even later 70D, 7D, 7DII and 80D all have MUCH better AF systems.

The 5DII was a nice upgrade from the original 5D in a number of ways... but the AF system wasn't one of them. Canon failed to improve that.

Someone else suggested an original 6D as a better alternative.... And, yes, it has even higher usable ISO for somewhat lower light shooting. It uses a newer and slightly lower resolution sensor to accomplish that. HOWEVER, it's 11-point AF system is very similar to the 5DII's. It has a cross-type AF point at the center while the other 10 are the lower performance single axis type. There are no "hidden/Assist" points with the 6D. It's center AF point is more low light capable though.... able to focus down to -3EV ("moonlight"). In comparison, 60D's and 5DII's systems are rated to be good to -1EV.

Aside from the AF system and high ISO performance, 6D is 20MP.... 5DII is 21MP (same sensor as used in the 1Ds Mark III, except the 5DII offers a higher ISO range with it).

Canon finally "got serious" with AF system improvements in the 5D Mark III: 61 points, 41 cross-type... similar to what later 1D-series cameras use.

They did with the 6D Mark II, too: 45-points, all cross-type, inherited from the 80D. The main complaint about the 6DII's AF is that the cluster of points is somewhat centered in the image area... leaving a lot of blank space around it. It's almost as if Canon just used the smaller format camera's AF without scaling it up to better match the full frame camera.

Also, 5DIII and 6DII are both "f/8 capable". This means that their AF system can handle more teleconverter/lens combinations. 5D, 5DII, 6D and 60D are all "f/5.6 limited". Those models essentially turn off their AF system whenever any lens/teleconverter combo results in effective max aperture smaller than f/5.6. (Note: a few f/6.3 lenses "fool" the system into continuing to work but can't be used with any teleconverters on the f/5.6 limited models.)

Also note that the 6D has 1/4000 top shutter speed, compared to 1/8000 in 5DII. 6D also has a slower flash sync too. It also doesn't have connectivity for a flash sync cord. 5DII also is a better built camera. 5DII's shutter is rated for 150,000 actuations, versus 100,000 in 6D. 5DII has control layout more similar to 50D, 7D, 7DII (i.e., "joystick" and rear control dial).... while 6D's is more similar to 60D, 70D (i.e., multi-direction buttons). Both cameras use LP-E6/E6N batteries (same as 60D). 5DII uses Compact Flash memory cards. 6D uses SD cards.

Looking for affordable full frame, 6D and 5DII certainly are some viable options... both with some limitations. 5DII is about 4 years older model, but in some ways superior to the 6D. The 6D's primary advantage is low light/high ISO capabilities. But the 5DII is pretty good at that too.

But the first question you should ask yourself is whether or not you really need full frame. Changing format will not instantly make your photos better. There are a lot of myths about "full frame goodness". There are some purposes where FF is superior. But I'd wager a lot of people who spend the extra for full frame AND for full frame capable lenses to use upon them actually never see much difference from them. .

APS-C have their advantages and are better at some things. Among other things, sticking with APS-C gives you access to more lenses... which also can be smaller, lighter and less expensive. Depending upon what you shoot and how you shoot it, an upgrade to a newer, 24MP 80D might make more sense. Or, a 5D Mark II might be just what you need. Only you can say.

More comparisons can be seen here:

https://cameradecision.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II
https://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/canon/5d-mark-ii/vs/canon/6d/
https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/canon-5d-mark-ii-vs-canon-6d
https://www.borrowlenses.com/blog/canon-6d-vs-5d-mark-ii/

At several of those sites, you can change the selections to compare any other two models you wish, too.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I like your thinking. The Tammy 28-75 will work nicely. - I would save a few hundred more and get a 5D III (ebay) if I could and pass on the II version tho. I see III's for $1k, or less.

Or, get a Sony A7II ( about $800 on ebay) and the Sigma MC11 adapter for your Tammy 28-75.

..

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Yeah, but an almost 10 year old 5d2 is NOT a D850.

dick ranez

there's not much that the 5dii will do that the 60d won't. the larger sensor will make a small difference in image quality, but not so much that most people will be able to tell the difference. If you only make small prints (11X14 or smaller) you'll never notice. Given your current equipment, I'd consider a wide angle for the 60 (the 10-18 ef-s lens is a low cost treasure) and spend your effort saving money and reading your 60D manual. The advice for better m4/3 lens is right on if you like that camera, and primes, particularly if you use it for video, will make a world of difference.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Tamron SP AF ASPHERICAL XR Di LD (IF) 28-75mm 1:2.8 MACRO is a full frame lens. I used it ten years ago on a 5D with no issues. It performs well between f/4 and f/8. My employer put 440 of them in our photographers’ hands between 2004 and 2011.