Captain Craig Loc: Denver, CO

Thank you for your advice. I know there are deals to be had on used cameras, but I kinda spoil myself. I like quality and I like new. I will probably start planning on the 5D IV, and in the mean time if Canon works out the mirrorless bugs, maybe I'll jump there. It just depends upon when I get the money together for the 5D IV. I think I would be quite happy for many many years with that.

Leinik Loc: Rochester NY

If I were you I would go for the latest Canon Eos R (mirrorless). Latest technology, lighter, more flexible. Mirrorless have many advantages over DSLR (one of them being real time control of exposure).

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

You will LOVE the 5D4. Just replaced my workhorse 5D3 with one, and it is one excellent body. Many pros are making a living with that body and the same two lenses you already have.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Excellent choice.

GrahamO

You have 2 very good lenses, and the lens is more important than the camera. Your photos won’t become any better by buying a new camera. Personally I wouldn’t mix Canon lenses on a Sony camera, especially now Canon are making mirrorless cameras. It’s early days with them, and there will only be improvements and no doubt lower prices coming. All new mirrorless cameras provide an opportunity for lens makers to make more exotic lenses for you to buy but you already have excellent lenses. Going to full frame will make your existing lenses wider as the FF sensor uses more of the lens image circle. ( coverage ) Low light performance will be improved and images can be enlarged more; if you need that.
I use full frame Canon 5D4 and Canon 80D, the latter being similar to your T6s, with some “improvements”. If you learn to shoot and edit RAW images on your existing camera you will get great improvements over shooting jpeg. Or if you want to spend money you could consider a faster prime lens ( non zoom ) This could be in whatever is your favourite single focal length, but as I mentioned your existing lenses are excellent. I suggest you wait until your T6s gives trouble (unlikely) or you drop it. Then don’t spend money fixing it. Time then to buy a new mirrorless camera.

Larry Powell Loc: Columbus OH

He has 2.8 lenses.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Your lowest cost and easiest upgrade would be to another Canon camera.... if that's even necessary.

What do you find the T6s is NOT doing for you? How do you feel it's lacking? What are you looking to accomplish with a "better" camera?

Or is this just a case of "the grass is greener" and money burning a hole in your pocket?

You mentioned what you shoot, as well as the camera and lenses you have now... But it would also be helpful to know what you do with your images? If you are making big prints, that would call for one type of camera. If you are mostly just sharing pics online or providing people with digital copies and slideshows to playback on a TV or computer screen, a totally different type of camera would more than fill the need. You also didn't say if you shoot video... or just stills.

You didn't mention anything about post-processing. You actually might be better getting a software upgrade, or a layer of security with backups, or upgrading and calibrating your computer monitor. You mention portraits, so lighting gear might be useful to you.

I was going to suggest a newer camera model for Anti-Flicker mode, since it sounds as if you shoot some event in gymnasiums (basketball, gymnastics) and possibly other indoor venues (ballet) where the lighting can cause exposure problems.... However, when I checked I found that the T6s (760D) has the Anti-Flicker feature too (as do Canon T6s/750D, T7i/800D, 77D, 80D, 7D Mark II and all the current full frame models). So there's no need to "upgrade" just to get Anti-Flicker. Are using it? I use it a lot at certain indoor venues with my 7D Mark IIs and it works really well! I see far fewer under-exposed images, when I remember to enable Anti-Flicker. I know Nikon only offers a similar feature on two DSLR modes (D500 and D850). I don't know what Sony cameras might have it, but now that I've used it for indoor shooting it's not something I'd want to be without!

Mirrorless cameras have both advantages and disadvantages, compared to DSLRs. They may or may not be a good option for you.

The same is true of full frame cameras (both DSLRs and mirrorless).... they have their pluses and minuses too.

For example, if you switch to any full frame camera, for field sports like soccer, you will very likely find a 70-200mm insufficient. While you might "get by" with that zoom on an APS-C format camera, with a "full frame upgrade" you'll quite likely also need an additional lens such as a Canon 100-400mm II (excellent, but around $2000).... or a Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 OS HSM with a 1.4X (also excellent, but over $3500 for lens & matched teleconverter). The 100-400 is slilghtly bigger and heavier than your 70-200/2.8 and not as "low light capable" due to it's f/4.5-5.6 aperture. The Sigma 120-300mm is f/2.8 (without the TC... f/4 with it) but is much bigger and heavier. It's close to 7.5 lb. for the lens alone (almost 2.5X the weight of your 70-200mm).

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

We can't tell who you are addressing unless you use "Quote Reply" as I did here.

GrahamO

Larry, yes he already has f2.8 zoom lenses. F2.8 is not very fast. In terms of light transmission an f2.8 zoom is really something more like f3.5. (you can check this exactly on the DXO website) Zooms usually have more light loss than primes, as well as more distortion and vignetting, and less sharpness, than prime lenses used at the same aperture. Prime lenses are not for everyone, as used wide open, say f1.4 they are more critical in achieving correct focus but they do provide beautiful out of focus backgrounds especially for portraits, and are unsurpassed in low light. I have f2.8 zooms and f1.4 primes but my fast primes get most use. A typical f1.4 prime might really be f1.7 in terms of light transmission but this is far faster than f3.5.

Captain Craig Loc: Denver, CO

Thank you for the tip, I wasn't aware of the quote reply.

EastendSteve Loc: New York Metropolitan Area

I'm a lifetime Nikon owner, so I can't comment on Canon camera models.

But I can tell you that, having been told this by a professional wildlife photographer, "It's all in the glass."

Frankly, that's an oversimplification but it's generally true. If you have mediocre lenses and you upgrade your camera (sensor), the result will be the painful knowledge of how lousy your glass is.

Based on those five words, I decided to invest in some good full-frame ("FX" in Nikon-speak) lenses for my D7100. The results were immediately visible to me. Photos I took with those lenses were incredibly crisp from a very good, but not mind-boggling, APS-C sensor.

This approach to improving the quality of your experience was shared with me almost 50 years ago by a friend who was a hi-fi (truly high-fidelity) enthusiast. He told me that, when upgrading your sound system, you should start with the signal from the source. In other words, first get a better cartridge and needle. Then get a better pre-amp. Then a better amplifier and, finally, upgrade your speakers.

Whether it's light or sound, the cleaner the information, the better the result. Upgrading out of order will only lead to frustration.

Captain Craig Loc: Denver, CO

I can relate to the cartridge and needle, thank you for the walk down memory lane.

GrahamO

Regarding using Canon lenses on Sony mirrorless cameras; many folk were adapting Canon lenses as Sony didn’t, and still doesn’t have the range of lenses that Canon does. This is slowly changing as third party manufacturers are now making often very good lenses for mirrorless. Mirrorless cameras are capable of supporting new lens designs such as the new Canon 28 / 70 f2 ( I think it is ). Such lenses are actually bigger and heavier than DSLR lenses generally speaking.

I went to a professional release late last year of the new Canon R mirrorless cameras, and the Canon rep started by saying “Mirrorless is all about the lens”. Meaning they can design newer faster wider lenses because of the thinner mirrorless bodies and the larger diameter lens mount opening.

I saw nothing about the new Canon R mirrorless that made me want to get one over my 5D4. In fact the Canon rep also said “This is no 5D4”. I handled the new cameras with the new lenses and I found for me, the small mirrorless body was fiddly with small control buttons coupled with necessarily bigger lenses. However I might just rather have one than my 80D, but not enough to fork out the cash. Especially as I’m very happy with my existing arsenal of lenses (and my 80D) and don’t need to buy more.

If you were to have a problem using Canon lenses on a Sony camera, Sony would blame Canon and vice versa.

I’m sure the future will be with mirrorless cameras as apart from anything else it must be cheaper for manufacturers to do away with the mirror box and pentaprisim and substitute electronics. Asked about a mirrorless replacement for the 5D4, the same Canon rep said “I don’t know, but as designs are heading that way, it would be logical to have a mirrorless replacement for the 5D4 one day”

Cameras like the 5D4 (including Nikon) are pretty well the peak of DSLR design. So would you rather have that or the newer mirrorless designs that are still being developed?

It’ll be interesting to see what is going to be used at the next Olympic Games. I suspect that there will be some real professional mirrorless cameras from Canon by then. Canon DSLRs and lenses were probably in the majority at the last games and they got the results. Maybe even faster frames / second and bigger buffers and follow focus that will keep a 100 metre runner sharp towards the camera all the way for around 9 seconds will be required, but what will that cost?

DelRae Loc: Oregon

I also have Canon Lens 24-70/2.8 And 70-200/2.8 I had a t6i I really liked it but wanted to move up so I got the 80D a guy on here kept on telling me to get the 6D mark II well I did not listen to him. so got the 80D was not happy with it that much I call Canon Ask if I could send it back they let me and I order the 6D mark II I love it thank you Chris. I do high School Soccer, Basketball, Volleyball and people really like my pictures. what ever you do dont let people talk you in to taking pictures of their kids way to much work not going to do that next year hope this helps you out

GrahamO

Right DelRae, not worth getting the 80D as a replacement for t6i. Not enough difference. I use my 80D for walking, cycling, boating, (30’ boat so fairly dry) and lightweight compact travel. I recently bought the Sigma 18/35 f1.8 Art (for apsc) and it absolutely transformed the 80D to a new level approaching FF results. I’m not specially recommending the 18/35 as it takes a certain degree of skill to use. No auto focus problems at all but at f1.8 it’s a fine line. I use a lighter weight lens for cycling.
Otherwise I use 5D4 not all that different to your 6D11.