Canon 80D Announced

Genoma said:
I'll be honest I'm starting to get confused with the overlap in the Canon line up, and there is nothing exciting enough to make me move from my 650D + RX100 combo.

I've even managed good results with a few mountain biking shots with 9 AF points fine :) most of the time I'm only using 1 anyway. Am I doing it wrong? :)
Click to expand...

no go back a few years and every wedding tog in the game was fine with 9 point af and plenty of pro sports togs were too! We are just spoiled these days there is very little you can't do with 9 point af it's just something's are easier with more there is for example nothing stopping you shooting wildlife or sports with a 6d you might have to work harder and your hit rate may be down but you'd still get plenty of usable shots. Much like people saying you need x frames per second to shoot sport you don't at all it is just nice to have and makes things easier.
 
I think main thing for me going from
60d
To 70d
And probably 80d

For focal points is when I have a really shallow DoF and I'm trying to get an animals face in focus
Sometimes this can be in the top 3rd and right 3rd of the frame. And there aren't any focal points here.
Even on the 70d

I'm probably doing it wrong but it's when I like a single specific focal point
 
Admiral Huddy said:
But the 7dII is £500-£600 more. That's a lot to pay for a few extra AF points. Besides, the 70d/80d have a pop out Qtouch screen and wifi which i find pretty useful.
Click to expand...

This. I'm surprised how close the 80D is to the 7D2 in terms of features. I think it'll steal a lot of potential 7D2 purchases.
 
413x said:
I think main thing for me going from
60d
To 70d
And probably 80d

For focal points is when I have a really shallow DoF and I'm trying to get an animals face in focus
Sometimes this can be in the top 3rd and right 3rd of the frame. And there aren't any focal points here.
Even on the 70d

I'm probably doing it wrong but it's when I like a single specific focal point
Click to expand...



AF pint spread is as important as the number of AF points, unfortunately cameras with a mirror can't have points spread too far from the center for various technical reasons. Things are actually much worse on FF cameras, the points can just about reach the edges of an APS-C frame, so on FF there is a big missing chunk. This is another advantage of crop cameras for wildlife, and another reason to eventually go mirror-less when EVF and AF technology catches up.



The number of AF points and AF density is actually more important for focus tracking and continuous focus. With more points it is easier to track moving subjects like birds.
 
Also just as important as number and spread is the nature of the points themselves which hardly ever gets mentioned. An example is the 61-point system in the 1DX and 5D3 versus the newer 65-point system in the 7D2. On the face of it the latter looks superior but closer inspection of the system reveals the 61-point system has some major advantages.
 
smr said:
But severely lacking for anything other than Landscapes. That's a strictly FF landscape body imo, useless for wildlife and sports.
Click to expand...

I would actually disagree with that. I know someone who uses the 6D camera for sport images as well as landscapes, portraits etc....

You don't really need a fast camera for sports or action, you need knowledge, skill, timing and understanding with a dash if anticipation. Simplzz... ;)
 
D.P. said:
Its also hard to compare some of the AF points, e.g. some of the regular AF points can outperform the cross-types for example. Some AF points work well at f/8, some only at f/2.8 etc.

Here is a reasonable article explaining some of the complexities:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/canon-eos-dslr-autofocus-explained.aspx
Click to expand...

They did a comparison of the 5D3/1DX and 7D2 systems too: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Comparisons/Canon-EOS-7D-II-1D-X-5D-III-AF-Comparison.aspx
 
smr said:
But severely lacking for anything other than Landscapes. That's a strictly FF landscape body imo, useless for wildlife and sports.
Click to expand...

Is useless really a phrase that should be applied to a modern DSLR whatever the brand or spec, are you seriously suggesting that a 6D would not be able to get decent images of a bird in flight or man playing football?

"Not as good as" would surely be more appropriate.
 
Columbo said:
Is useless really a phrase that should be applied to a modern DSLR whatever the brand or spec, are you seriously suggesting that a 6D would not be able to get decent images of a bird in flight or man playing football?

"Not as good as" would surely be more appropriate.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Were there never any good sports or wildlife photos taken with manual focus, manual winder film cameras then?

Modern DSLRs are crammed full of crutches. Very nice features to have of course, but crutches nonetheless.
 
Columbo said:
Is useless really a phrase that should be applied to a modern DSLR whatever the brand or spec, are you seriously suggesting that a 6D would not be able to get decent images of a bird in flight or man playing football?

"Not as good as" would surely be more appropriate.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean useless literally lol - problem with the Internet is there's you can't convey a tone with words :p everything just comes across as really frank. :D

I've taken keepers of sport (F1 at Silverstone and had them published) and wildlife with my 700D so it's obvious that the 6D is of course capable of taking action images but it's AF system etc. isn't geared towards it at all really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom