#5d mark iii vs 6d for video movie
#5d mark iii vs 6d for video full
#5d mark iii vs 6d for video pro

Oh, this camera also does video (has a headphone jack if you care about that).Дon't forget to still get decent glass. I knew the image quality and the performance of the camera were up to the job. I love my 5D Mark III, but at times I reached for that Nikon D7100. (Yep, I own a 5D Mark III and Im a ML believer.) Probably the 6D Mark II will excel in extended dynamic range at base ISO. While ML is generally known for its video capabilities, the still capture features really make the 5D Mark III into a super still image machine. I shot a festival event and some basketball games over the weekend. I believe so, especially if you include Magic Lantern (ML) for the 5D Mark III. There are times when I look at the files I get out of the Nikon d7100 that are honestly comparable to full-frame like the 5D Mark III (in lower ISO's). The 7D/60D don't match up (IQ wise) (obviously since their older). It is one of the best crop cameras I've used to date. I've been using a Nikon d7100 the past few months and I will be perfectly honest with you. If you shoot low-light environment, it's the way to go.

#5d mark iii vs 6d for video full

Do you really need a full frame? Depends. Feature comparison Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features.

#5d mark iii vs 6d for video movie

Easier to work with photos in post, cleans up betterД¬an you still get great shots on crop cameras? Absolutely (as long as you don't pixel peep too much 1:1). It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the 5D Mark III is limited to 1080/30p. It won't be a full-frame competitor, but it should have some improvements in image quality over the 60D/7D cameras.ДЎ. 'I think'this Canon 70D will be a formidable low light camera/action. But it's a very specialized lens, and one whose value cannot be replicated at most other focal lengths. Again if it were me I would go for the 80D over the 6D Mk II. This might not be a factor for you but it would be for me.

#5d mark iii vs 6d for video pro

The 6D line is an entry level series but the 5D line is pro level. The Samyang 14mm prime is a glaring exception, offering corner-to-corner sharpness for bargain-bin pricing ($350). IMHO, I would go for a 5D Mk III every time.

But based on my experience thus far, for some applications, one could easily argue I spent a lot of money to get results whose advantages (cleaner files) are offset by other disadvantages (softer corners). If your budget is just high enough for a 6D, but not enough for several top-end L lenses, are you sure the lower noise is worth the potential tradeoff of softer corners? That was actually the decision I had to make recently, and I decided it was worth moving to the 6D from crop, with the hopes of acquiring better glass over time.

You really have to weigh the pros and cons in the context of your budget. Either way, you're looking at a much higher budget for good lenses on FF. Some primes are relatively affordable, but you need several of them to cover the range that one lens like the EF-S 17-55 IS covers perfectly well on crop. One of the bigger questions that we get now that Canon has an entry level DSLR, in the form of the Canon 6D, is regarding if people should choose the 6D or the Canon 5D Mk III. To get corner-to-corner sharpness on FF, you often need to look at primes or very expensive zooms like the 24-70L II. But in my experience, the 10-22mm was a lot sharper in the corners on crop than my 17-40L is on FF. They unveiled quite possibly the most anticipated release of 2012 in the 5D Mark 3 and, just in time for. For example, the 10-22mm and 17-40L are about the same price and serve roughly the same function on crop and FF, respectively. Canon, like Nikon have had a busy year with regards to their full frame camera releases. tend to have soft corners and other more noticeable flaws on full frame. Similarly-priced lenses like the 17-40L, 24-105L, etc. In fact, some respectable third-party alternatives to those lenses go for under $500! In general, it's much harder (and more expensive) to achieve that on full frame. On crop, lenses like the EF-S 10-22mm and EF-S 17-55mm IS can be had for $600-800 apiece, and will give you awesome sharpness and image quality throughout the frame. I say 'unfortunately' because, in general, lenses that are sharp across the larger image circle of the full frame sensors are substantially more expensive. Which factor is the bottleneck can vary depending on the situation, or even across different parts of the image. Unfortunately, image quality is a function of both the sensor and the lens. It will give you slightly cleaner images at low ISO, and much cleaner images at moderate to high ISO. The 6D/5D3 sensor is substantially better than crop sensors.

In this video, Lok C compares the new Canon 7D Mark II() with some full frame EOS alternatives.Full frame is a mixed bag, in terms of pros and cons, unless you have a budget at least around $4-5k (including the body).