Camera Gear Comparisons (Page 2)

With the release of the Sony a7R III, many may be wondering how Sony's latest high-resolution full-frame mirrorless camera stacks up against Canon's latest 5-series camera, the EOS 5D Mark IV, and which camera might suit their needs best. So, let's dig into the details and find out.

First, let's take a look at some differentiating specifications between the two cameras.

Size, Weight and Battery Life

As indicated by the table above, the Sony a7R III is smaller and lighter than the Canon 5D Mark IV, traits that many will appreciate. But, there are drawbacks to the a7R III's smaller size and lighter weight.

The first drawback is that the smaller design leads to a smaller battery, which in turn results in a shorter battery life. The second drawback is that the smaller design can also lead to an uncomfortable grip for those with medium-sized hands (or larger) when using the a7R III with many pro-grade lenses.

The Sony a7R III's smaller size and lighter weight will surely be appreciated by those who must hike significant distances to their desired photo locations. And for those shooting landscapes with a tripod, the comfort of a camera's grip may be a low priority. But for those shooting weddings, festivals or events – situations requiring that the camera be handheld for long periods of time – may appreciate the 5D Mark IV's more comfortable grip as well as its roughly 50% longer battery life.

Viewfinders

Viewfinder implementations differ significantly between the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV and the Sony a7R III, where the Canon body offers a traditional optical viewfinder (with customizable overlays) and the Sony body features an electronic viewfinder. Each type of viewfinder has benefits and drawbacks compared to the other (such as an EVF's elimination of viewfinder blackout times), and Bryan shared his thoughts on the advantages/disadvantages of electronic/optical viewfinders in his article, "Comparing Electronic Viewfinders to Optical Viewfinders". Be sure to check out the preceding information to determine which of these systems you may prefer.

Durability & Reliability

The time span between Canon's first 5-series camera to its latest iteration, the Mark IV, was 11 years (2005 - 2016). The time span between Sony's first a7R and the introduction of the a7R III was 4 years (2013 - 2017).

Canon rates the 5D Mark IV's shutter at 150,000 actuations; Sony claims the a7R III can withstand 500,000 actuations. If both companies are using similar procedures for determining shutter reliability, then Sony's significantly higher shutter rating will be comforting.

The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV and the Sony a7R III are solidly built and both are billed as "weather resistant" cameras. However, Canon has had significantly more time to refine their camera design for optimal protection from water and dust. We didn't test the thoroughly test the cameras' weather resistance, but we'd personally feel more confident shooting with the 5D Mark IV in adverse conditions.

Autofocus Performance

Sony's mirrorless cameras' AF performance has dramatically improved over the last couple of years, resulting in the gap between mirrorless and traditional DSLR AF performance quickly diminishing. But while the Sony a7R III focuses faster in one shot mode compared to its predecessor, it still isn't as fast as the 5D Mark IV. That's because the a7R III must defocus in order to obtain focus, causing a noticeable delay even when little has changed in the scene between shutter clicks.

In AF tracking mode, both cameras perform similarly well (either in viewfinder mode or LCD/Live View focusing).

Menu System

Having used Canon cameras for a number of years, we've grown acclimated to Canon's logical, easy to use menu system. Unfortunately, the Sony a7R III menu system seems needlessly complicated with 45 subtabs under the 5 main tabs. That Sony has included a customizable "My Menu" option has helped, allowing for quick access to your most-used menu items. Even so, we still greatly prefer the Canon menu system.

Video

While both cameras allow for 4K recording at 30p, there are some distinct differences between the cameras' video features. First, the 5D Mark IV records 4K video in .MOV (Motion JPEG) format with a crop factor of 1.74x; the a7R III in XAVC S:MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 using the full senor width (no crop). This difference alone may be the deciding factor between the two cameras if wide angle, 4K video is a top priority for you. The Sony camera is also capable of recording Full HD (1080p) video at 120 fps, while the Canon DSLR tops out at 60 fps.

Video shooters will also love the Sony a7R III's built-in 5-axis stabilization, allowing for smoother video recording regardless of the lens that's attached, as well as its tilting LCD screen for odd-angle shooting. The a7R III also features S-LOG 3 and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) Picture Profiles, while Canon Log is only available as an add-on (more expensive) upgrade for the 5D mark IV.

Customer Support

Canon is widely recognized as having an excellent support system, including (not not limited to) Canon Professional Services, the division which specifically caters to those who make a living with their imaging gear. The support we have received from Canon USA and Canon Professional Services has over the years has been very good. Canon USA's Customer Service Technicians have been eager to help and knowledgeable when we have needed phone support, and our experience with Canon's repair department (in the few times we've needed a repair) has been equally satisfying.

On the other hand, Sony is still in the building process when it comes to customer support for their E-mount camera system. As such, they don't necessarily have a reputation for exemplary customer service [yet, though things seem to be getting better].

Price

At the time of this comparison, the Sony a7R III's retail price is roughly $300.00 less expensive than the EOS 5D Mark IV, not counting instant rebates which can make the cameras much closer in price. But when considering the cost of the camera, it's also wise to think about the cost of the whole camera kit you may be considering.

Therefore, let's take a look at two comparable kits based on the two cameras.

Sony a7R III
Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM
Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM
Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS
Total MSRP: $10,192.00

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Total MSRP: $9,696.00 ($8,996.00 with current rebates)

Of course, MSRP values and the availability (and values) of instant rebates can change over time (possibly changing the advantage), but the above represents a current advantage of the Canon kit. Interesting is that the difference in weight between these two kits is only 9.6 oz (272 g), with the Canon kit being slightly heavier.

Wrap Up

There's no doubt that you can use either of these cameras in a professional setting to create high quality images or video. If you primarily shoot video, though, the Sony a7R III's advanced video features will likely make it the best overall choice for your needs. And, if you aren't heavily invested in the Canon ecosystem already, choosing the a7R III may make a lot of sense.

However, if you already have a decent Canon camera kit and you're not primarily a video shooter, I'm not convinced that the Sony a7R III offers enough advantages over the 5D IV to justify the cost, time and energy of completely switching brands. In which case, the Canon 5D Mark IV would most likely be the better option.

Note: Because of the performance limitations experienced when using Canon lenses on Sony cameras (via adapters), we don't consider that to be a viable solution (yet) for most serious photographers.

So what are the differentiators that keep you from switching from one of these cameras to the other? Let us know in the comments.

With the recent release of the Sony a7R III, many may be wondering, "Should I get the a7R III or get the less expensive a7R II instead?" That's a very fair question, and that's why we're going to be looking at how these two MILCs (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Cameras) stack up against one another.

Sony a7R III and Sony a7R II Shared Primary Features

• 42.4 MP full frame sensor
• Wi-FI & NFC
• 399 phase-detection AF
• EV -3 – EV 20 metering range
• 30 - 1/8000 sec shutter speed
• 0.78x viewfinder magnification
• Up to 4K: 3840 x 2160 30p/100 Mbps video recording

Primary Advantages of the Sony a7R III over the Sony a7R II

• Faster, more accurate AF system with multi-selector joystick for much easier focus point changes
• 425 contrast AF points vs. 25
• Up to 10 fps, 28 RAW (Uncompressed) buffer vs. 5 fps, 22 RAW (Uncompressed)
• ISO 100 - 32,000 (Exp: ISO 50 – 102400) vs. ISO 100 - 25,600 (Exp: ISO 50 – 102400)
• 3.69m-Dot Quad-VGA Tru-Finder OLED EVF vs. 0.5" 2.36M-Dot XGA OLED Tru-Finder EVF (the III has 1.5x resolution, approx. 2x luminance, 120 fps, 30% faster startup, high quality mode)
• 3.0" 1.44m-Dot Tilting Touchscreen (limited) LCD vs. 3.0" 1,228.8k-Dot Tilting LCD Monitor
• Approx. 650 frame battery life (stills, LCD monitor) vs. 340
• 5.5 stop IBIS vs. 4.5 stops
• Higher quality full-frame 4K high-sensitivity movies, improved movie AF, Hybrid Log-Gamma, S-Log3, Slow&Quick motion, Photo Capture, Proxy Recording
• Dual SD memory card slots vs. single SD (III supports high write speeds)
• Full HD 1080p video at 120 fps vs. 60 fps
• S-LOG 3 and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) Picture Profiles vs. N/A
• Pixel Shift Multi Shooting vs. N/A
• USB 3.1 Gen 1 Type-C port vs. USB 2.0
• Anti-flicker shutter timing vs. N/A
• Built-in Bluetooth, Wi-Fi (w/ftp) & NFC vs. Wi-Fi & NFC only
• Customizable My Menu
• Improved peaking, Focus magnification with AF support, Rating, Display continuous shooting group

Primary Advantages of the Sony a7R II over the Sony a7R III

• Lower cost
• Slightly smaller size, lighter weight: 5.0 x 3.8 x 2.4" (126.9 × 95.7 x 60.3mm), 22.0 oz (625g) vs. 5.0 x 3.88 x 3.0" (126.9 x 95.6 x 73.7mm), 23.2 oz (657g)

Who should opt for the Sony a7R III?

Those who wish to capture high resolution sports imagery will immediately appreciate the Sony a7R III's twice-as-fast burst rate (10 fps vs. 5), image grouping display, upgraded AF system and [possibly] the new anti-flicker shutter timing (it may work better under some conditions than it worked in our tests). Those using the a7R III for professional filmmaking will likely benefit from the ability to record 1080p video at 120 fps, the upgraded AF, improved peaking and the S-LOG 3 and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) Picture Profiles.

Wedding photographers will enjoy the added security of the a7R III's dual memory card slots, and sharing images immediately on social media will be made easier with built-in Bluetooth.

Regardless of one's specialty, the upgraded IBIS system providing an extra stop of assistance to help keep images sharp will surely be appreciated by almost all photographers. The same sentiment holds true for the a7R III's increased battery life.

Who should opt for the Sony a7R II?

As is typical of successor vs. predecessor camera comparisons, the primary reason to recommend the purchase of a camera's predecessor – in this case, the Sony a7R II – is the older camera's lower cost. And in this case, the trend continues, with the a7R II weighing in with a 25% discount (with instant rebates) compared to the a7R III.

Landscape, architecture/real estate and studio photographers, in particular, who don't necessarily need a better AF system or a faster burst rate, will have fewer reasons to invest in the a7R III's upgraded features as the a7R II's sensor provides similar, high image quality. That said, the brighter viewfinder and longer battery life of the a7R III will be welcomed even by these groups.

Relevant Review

• Sony a7R III Review

B&H carries the Sony a7R III and Sony a7R II mirrorless full frame cameras.

If you are a professional, semi-pro or a serious enthusiast photographer who is in the market for a reliable, robust, full-frame Canon camera, the two bodies most likely to be considered are the EOS-1D X Mark II and EOS 5D Mark IV. In this installment of "Which Should I Get?," we'll take a look at these two camera bodies to see which might be the better keystone for your kit.

First of all, let's look at a few of the primary specifications that these bodies have in common:

Canon EOS-1D X Mark II and EOS 5D Mark IV Shared Primary Features

• Full-frame, Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor
• AF system: 61 Point / 41 cross-type AF point including 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 and 61 points / 21 cross-type AF points at f/8
• AF Working Range: EV -3 - 18
• Metering Range: EV 0 – 20
• Ambience & White Priority Auto White Balance
• 100% viewfinder coverage
• 3.2" (8.10cm) Clear View LCD II, approx. 1620K dots
• Up to 4K (Motion JPEG) video recording with 4K frame grab
• Built-in GPS

Primary advantages of the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II over the EOS 5D Mark IV:

• Dual DIGIC 6+ processors vs. single DIGIC 6+
• ISO 100-51200, L 50, H1 102400, H2 204800, H3 409600 vs. ISO 100-32000, L 50, H1 51200, H2 102400
• Approx. 14fps with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to unlimited number of JPEGs or 170 RAW images (with CFast 2.0 card) vs. approx. 7fps with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to unlimited number of JPEGs or 21 RAW images
• Approx. 360,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 216-zone metering vs. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering
• AF point-linked spot metering vs. center-point only spot metering
• 1/250 sec. max flash x-sync vs. 1/200 sec.
• 5 Custom White Balance settings can be registered vs. 1 setting
• 4K video recording max frame rate 59.94 fps vs. 4K video max 29.97 fps
• Interchangeable focusing screens vs. N/A
• 34 custom functions vs. 17
• Sound memos vs. N/A
• RJ-45 (gigabit Ethernet) port vs. N/A
• Approx. 1210 frame battery life vs. 900
• 400,000 shutter durability rating vs. 150,000
• Better weather sealing

Primary advantages of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV over the EOS-1D X Mark II:

• 30.4 MP vs. 20.2
• Smaller & Lighter: 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm), 31.4 oz (890g) vs. 6.22 x 6.6 x 3.25" (158.0 x 167.6 x 82.6mm), 53.97 oz (1530g)
• Full touch-screen LCD interface vs. limited touch-screen
• Built-in Wi-Fi & NFC vs. N/A (Wi-Fi requires Wireless File Transmitter WFT-E6A, WFT-E8A accessory)
• Lower price

Who should opt for the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II?

If you are a photographer primarily interested in capturing fast-action sports, the EOS-1D X Mark II's blazingly fast 14 fps burst rate and huge 170 frames RAW buffer (in our tests, the buffer was actually only limited to the CFast memory card's capacity) will help you capture the optimal moment(s) when the action is at its peak. And if your sporting event is held in inclement weather, the 1D X II's extra weather sealing will certainly be appreciated.

If you're primarily a studio photographer who doesn't need more than roughly 20 MP of resolution, the 1D X II's gigabit Ethernet port is a great asset for tethered shooting.

Those using their DSLR to capture video will appreciate the 1D X II's 4K recording at 60 fps, although the larger body may prove cumbersome in some setups. A benefit for some filmmakers (and a drawback for others) is the 1D X II's approximate 1.3x focal length crop factor utilized in 4K video recording allowing for wider angles of view to be captured at the same focal length compared to the 5D Mark IV featuring a 1.74x crop factor.

Nearly every photographer can benefit from the 1D X II's higher resolution metering sensor, and AF point-linked Spot metering feature (very helpful) is only available on 1-series bodies. The ability to change focus screens is another benefit of the 1D X II that could prove important for some photographers.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV?

If you need more resolution than the EOS-1D X Mark II offers, require built-in Wi-Fi/NFC, prefer a smaller and lighter camera body and/or your budget simply does not extend to the level of a 1-series body, the EOS 5D Mark IV will likely prove to be a great choice.

Sharing many important primary features with the EOS-1D X Mark II (with reasonable compromises on others), the EOS 5D Mark IV is the second-most versatile camera Canon has ever produced (the 1D X II being the most versatile). Considering that the 5D Mark IV costs over 40% less than the 1D X II (USA MSRP), those compromises will seem very reasonable for a great number of pro, semi-pro, enthusiast and hobbyist photographers alike.

Related Information

• Canon EOS 1D X Mark II DSLR Camera Review
• Canon EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR Camera Review

With two optically stabilized 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses hitting the market this year, many are likely wondering how the third-party lenses stack up against Canon's venerable – though unstabilized – EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM. Let's take a good look at the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art & Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 to find out which might make the best choice for own general purpose needs.

First, it's important to consider that these lenses are very similar from a primary features perspective, with built-in stabilization being the most notable differentiator. With that in mind, let's take a look at the shared set of features for these lenses:

Canon 24-70L II, Sigma 24-70 OS Art & Tamron 24-70mm VC G2 Shared Features

• Focal length range: 24-70mm
• Maximum aperture: f/2.8
• Filter size: 82mm
• Some degree of weather sealing

Now, let's see how these 24-70mm lenses differ from a design perspective:

Canon 24-70L II, Sigma 24-70 OS Art & Tamron 24-70mm VC G2 Differences

Sharpness Comparison

When it comes to sharpness, it's difficult to adequately describe which lens is the cream of the crop. The reason is simple – the "sharpest lens" title changes depending on the focal length and aperture chosen along with the specific area of the frame being considered.

After pouring over the results for quite some time, I decided to compile my own subjective findings. You can find them below. However, I encourage you to compare the lenses for yourself at the focal lengths and apertures you will likely use most to determine which lens may be sharpest for your specific intended uses.

For the results below, I ranked the three lenses at each specified focal length / aperture. If there was little or no discernible difference between two lenses, then I marked the comparison a tie.

Vignetting Comparison

Vignetting performance is not a significant differentiating factor for this group of 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses. There are minor differences, but... none that would likely motivate you to pick one over the other solely based on corner darkening. If precise vignetting performance is a priority for you, check out the links below.

Vignetting: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art
Vignetting: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2
Vignetting: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

Flare Performance

When evaluating flare performance, I typically compare lenses at f/16 at their widest and longest focal lengths. These comparisons usually give me a good idea of what to expect from the lens in near worst-case scenarios. Keep in mind that one's preference for tolerable types of flare is very subjective. Personally, I'd rather have an overall lose of contrast as opposed to clearly defined rings, circles and lines which are difficult to remove in post-processing and may block important details in the frame.

In this comparison, the Canon 24-70L II trails the Sigma and Tamron lenses at 24mm and f/16, at least as far as my personal preference is concerned.

Flare: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art
Flare: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

Between the Sigma Art and Tamron G2, the pattern of flare artifacts is very similar, although the Sigma may show a little more contrast.

Flare: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

At 70mm, the Canon still shows more clearly defined flare artifacts while the other two lenses show less overall contrast. It's difficult to pick a winner between the Sigma and Tamron lenses, but if pressed to pick one, I think I would prefer the Sigma's results.

Distortion

Zoom lenses typically exhibit barrel distortion at the wide end which transitions to pincushion distortion at the long end, and all of these lenses show these quintessential characteristics to varying degrees. As with vignetting, I don't think there is enough difference among the lenses to regard distortion as a major differentiating factor. However, if minimal distortion is a priority for you, compare the lenses at your most-used focal length to see which one will work best for your needs.

Distortion: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art
Distortion: Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2
Distortion: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art vs. Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2

With image quality sufficiently covered, let's dive into other aspects of the lenses to illuminate even more (likely more significant) differences.

Stabilization

Unlike most of the image quality comparisons above, this comparison is very straightforward – the Canon 24-70L II doesn't have built-in stabilization, while the Sigma and the Tamron lenses do. Between the two, the Sigma 24-70 Art seemed to provide slightly more handheld assistance in our tests.

Before we move on, I should point out that stabilization can have a huge impact on image quality, as a lens can only achieve its highest image quality when camera shake is neutralized (either by the use of a fast shutter speed or by lens/camera stabilization). Of course, stabilization does not help if your subject is moving, but... it can help a great deal when photographing stationary subjects.

Autofocus Performance

Generally speaking, you'll get the best AF performance – especially in regards to accuracy and consistency – when using Canon lenses with Canon cameras. In the case of the Canon 24-70L II, Sigma 24-70 OS Art and Tamron 24-70 VC G2, while the third party lens manufacturers have certainly closed the performance gap over the past few years, the general rule still applies.

The good news is that all of the lenses perform quite well when using the center AF point, assuming a proper autofocus microadjustment (AFMA) calibration. Unfortunately, AF performance degrades noticeably while utilizing the outer AF points with both the Sigma Art and Tamron G2 lenses. Our testing indicates that the Sigma is a little more consistent than the Tamron with outer AF point use.

Those who don't mind employing a focus-and-recompose technique or otherwise can utilize Live View focusing for image capture, can maximize their in-focus take home percentage when using third-party lenses.

One area where the third-party lenses are advantaged is autofocus calibration through the use of Sigma's USB Dock and Tamron's TAP-in Console. While many high-end Canon DSLRs have the ability to fine tune AF using AFMA, most consumer-to-mid-level Canon DSLRs do not have this feature. And even if your camera does feature AFMA, the USB Dock and TAP-in Console allow for finer control of adjustment options (including separate adjustments for varying focus distances). Another benefit of dock-adjusted AF is that a lens can be calibrated once for use on several bodies (assuming the same adjustment is necessary throughout the set) instead of having to enter the same adjustment value in-camera on several bodies.

Price

Price is one lens aspect that is quite easy and straightforward to compare. The Canon 24-70L II is the most expensive lens of the bunch, with the Sigma's price being about 30% lower than the Canon's (current MSRP in North America, no rebates). The Tamron is priced slightly less than the Sigma.

One thing to keep in mind when choosing to invest in a lens is the brand's typical resale value. Of the three manufacturers, Canon lenses tend to hold their value better than the third-party options.

Summary

By not including image stabilization in the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens, Canon left the door wide open for third-party manufacturers to produce an even more versatile and/or enticing general purpose lens. Both Sigma and Tamron saw the crack in Canon's armor, and the introduction of the 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art and 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 lenses represent the culmination of those manufacturers' efforts to unseat Canon in the professional general purpose lens market by taking advantage of Canon's biggest shortcoming.

Has either brand succeeded? In some ways the answer is "yes," and in other ways, "no." None of the lenses in this comparison blew away the competition, with the "best lens" being different based on one's own personal preferences and requirements. For those that cannot afford to miss a shot and prefer using viewfinder AF along with outer AF points (think, wedding photographers), the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM will likely be best. For the ultimate in versatility, however – thanks in large part to in-lens stabilization – the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art and Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 both offer compelling performance at a more budget friendly price. Ultimately, the choice between the Sigma and Tamron will likely hinge on one's preference for more accurate AF (Sigma) or increased potential sharpness (Tamron).

Want to know more about these lenses? Check out our full reviews linked below.

• Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens Review
• Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art Lens Review
• Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 Lens Review

Authorized Retailers:

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens
B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Canon USA Store | BuyDig | Wex Photographic | Henry's

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art Lens
B&H | Amazon | Adorama | BuyDig | Wex Photographic | Henry's

Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 Lens
B&H | Amazon | Adorama | BuyDig | Wex Photographic | Henry's

The Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM lens has been a staple in the manufacturer's lineup for more than 20 years. With the announcement of Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art lens in early 2017, consumers finally had a comparably spec'd alternative to Canon's popular 135mm wide-aperture prime. If you have been considering the addition of a wide-aperture telephoto prime lens to your Canon-based kit, you may be torn between the two options.

To help the decision making process along, we're going to see how these two designed-for-portraiture lenses stack up against one another to see which one might be the better choice for your needs.

Advantages of the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM over the Sigma 135mm f/2 DG HSM Art:

• Smaller & lighter: 3.27 x 4.41” (83 x 112mm), 26.5 oz (750g) vs. 3.6 x 4.52” (91.4 x 114.9mm), 39.9 oz (1130g)
• More consistent AF system
• Compatible with 1.4x & 2x Extenders
• Lower price

Advantages of the Sigma 135mm f/2 DG HSM Art over the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM:

• Wider max aperture (1/3-stop advantage): f/1.8 vs. f/2
• More aperture blades: 9 vs. 8
• More precise manual focusing: 147° of focus ring rotation vs. 120°
• Slightly larger maximum magnification: 0.20x vs. 0.19x
• AF fine tuning via USB dock

Who should opt for the Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM?

The EF 135mm f/2 USM has been a favorite among portrait photographers since its introduction. Its telephoto focal length combined with an f/2 max aperture makes backgrounds melt away giving more emphasis to your subject. In those ways, it's almost identical to the Sigma offering. However, from an AF perspective, Canon DSLRs tend to work optimally with Canon-designed lenses. While the Sigma 135 Art proved adequate (but not stellar) at consistently nailing focus in our tests, those shooting once-in-a-lifetime moments (weddings, editorial/documentary, etc.) will likely prefer the Canon option.

For those wanting to extend the lens's reach, the 135L is compatible with Canon's 1.4x and 2x Extenders with full AF being retained regardless of the body being used. The Sigma is not compatible with teleconverters.

If reduced size and weight are high priorities, the Canon's dimensions and weight will make it the preferred choice. Also, those with a limited budget will appreciate the Canon's significantly lower price tag.

Who should opt for the Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art?

With a 1/3-stop wider max aperture, a design that's 20 years newer and better wide-open image quality, there's very little not to like about Sigma's longest focal length Art lens (to date). As I mentioned above, AF consistency is not quite as good as the Canon alternative, but it will likely be sufficient for most photographers' needs.

Those shooting with a DSLR that does not feature Autofocus Microadjustment (like the Rebel-series and 77D) will certainly enjoy the Sigma 135 Art's ability to calibrate focus parameters via the Sigma USB dock, as they would need to send both their camera and lens to a Canon Service Center in order to similarly adjust a miscalibrated Canon lens.

Summary

While these lenses are more similar than they are different, the differences will be enough to tip the scales in one direction or the other based on a photographer's preferences, priorities and budget. Although a bit long in the tooth, the Canon 135 f/2L USM is still highly regarded by portrait specialists (and for good reason). However, the Sigma 135mm Art raised the bar in regards to wide-open image quality, and those wanting to add the latest and greatest to their kits will certainly benefit from Sigma's commitment to one-upping the competition with its Art-series releases.

More Information

• Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM Lens Review
• Sigma 135mm f/1.8 DG HSM Art Lens Review

With the announcement of the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM, many of those previously considering purchase of the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM may be now wondering which of Canon's L-series 85s is right for them. As such, we are going to take a look at how these lenses differ to hopefully make the decision making process a little easier.

Advantages of the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM over the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

• Better manual focusing experience: traditional MF vs. focus-by-wire
• More aperture blades: 9 vs. 8
• Image stabilization: 4-stops vs. none
• Weather sealed vs. not weather sealed
• Slightly higher max magnification: 0.12x vs. 0.11x
• Lighter: 33.5 oz vs. 36.2
• Slightly smaller diameter: 3.49" (88.6mm) vs. 3.6" (91.4mm)
• More common filter size: 77mm vs. 72
• Internal focusing vs. extends during focusing
• Lower cost

Advantages of the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM over the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM:

• Wider max aperture: f/1.2 vs. f/1.4
• Shorter length: 3.31” (84.1mm) vs. 4.15" (105.4mm)

Who should opt for the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

If you need the absolute widest aperture in your 85mm lens, either for action-stopping purposes or for maximizing separation between your subject and your background, then the EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM will ultimately be the best choice.

Who should opt for the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM

In two words – "everyone else."

The benefits of the EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM over the 85 f/1.2L II are both numerous and substantial. First and foremost, the lens' 4-stop IS system will enable you to shoot static subjects in significantly lower light while maintaining tolerable ISO levels. This is a huge benefit that should not be underestimated.

Next, the traditional manual focusing design will be welcomed by nearly every photographer who ever handled the 85mm f/1.2L II USM (or the EF 50mm f/1.2L USM, for that matter). The traditional design promises to be a much more responsive, akin to what we've come to expect from most L-series lenses.

The 85 f/1.4L IS's weather sealing further increases its versatility over the f/1.2 model. While we always advise taking precautions when inclement weather is expected, the 85L IS's weather sealing enables you to keep shooting without interruption in moderately wet or dusty conditions.

The EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM's lower cost will certainly be a universally-appreciated feature, as will the benefits of an extra aperture blade in creating a smooth background blur.

Summary

Unless you absolutely need or want an f/1.2 maximum aperture, the Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM will likely prove the best investment for most photographers because of its overall greater versatility and lower price.

More Information

• Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM Lens Expectations
• Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Review

If interested in purchasing a Canon Rebel-series camera, you may be wondering if the additional features of the Rebel T7i / 800D are worth the additional size and weight compared to the Rebel SL2 / 200D. If so, it's important to know how the two cameras stack up against one another.

Below are some of the primary similarities and differences between the Rebel T7i and Rebel SL2.

Canon EOS Rebel T7i and Rebel SL2 Shared Primary Features:

• 24.2 MP Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor
• DIGIC 7 processor
• ISO 100 - 25600 (H1: 51200)
• 30 - 1/4000 sec shutter speed (1/2 or 1/3 stop increments)
• 1/200 sec (flash) x-sync
• Ambience priority, White priority Auto White Balance (AWB)
• Pentamirror viewfinder with 95% coverage
• Vari-angle touchscreen LCD, 7.7 cm (3.0") 3:2 Clear View II TFT, approx. 1040 K dots
• Up to 1920 x 1080 (59.954, 29.97, 25, 23.98 fps) video recording
• Video output (PAL/ NTSC) (integrated with USB terminal), HDMI micro out, external microphone (3.5mm Stereo mini jack)
• Built-in Wi-Fi, NFC & Bluetooth

Advantages of the EOS Rebel T7i over the EOS Rebel SL2:

• More advanced AF: 45 cross-type AF points (27 f/8 points [9 cross-type], center point f/2.8 and f/5.6 dual cross-type) vs. 9 AF points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• Wider AF working range (better in low light): EV -3 - 18 vs. EV -0.5 -1
• Better metering: 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, metering with the area divided into 63 segments (9 × 7) vs. 63 zone dual-layer metering sensor
• More autoexposure bracketing (AEB) options: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV vs. 3 shots +/- 2 EV
• Intelligent viewfinder vs. fixed
• Single axis electronic level vs. N/A
• More powerful pop-up flash: 13.1 GN vs. 9.8
• Pop-up flash can act as master vs. N/A
• Faster continuous shooting and larger buffer: 6 fps, 27 RAW vs. 5 fps, 6 RAW
• Longer battery life: 820 shots vs. 650

Advantages of the EOS Rebel SL2 over the EOS Rebel T7i

• Higher viewfinder magnification: 0.87x vs. 0.82x
• Smaller size/weight: 4.82 x 3.65 x 2.75" (122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8mm), 15.98 oz (453g) vs. 5.16 x 3.93 x 3.00" (131.0 x 99.9 x 76.2mm), 18.77 oz (532g)
• Lower cost

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D?

If minimal size/weight are not top priorities, and the Rebel T7i's higher price tag is not a barrier to investment, the T7i's higher-end features will make it a more versatile choice for most photographers. In fact, its more advanced, more sensitive in low light AF system alone is likely worth the T7i's price over the SL2.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D?

If you want the most lightweight, compact DSLR, or if your budget does not extend to the Rebel T7i's price tag, the Rebel SL2 will be a solid investment. The SL2 provides a solid feature set at a very reasonable price, and anyone carrying their camera kit for long periods of time (those hiking, for example) will surely appreciate the camera's smaller size and weight. Other groups who will gravitate to the SL2 include those with smaller hands and those intending to use the camera in a high-risk remote setup. Because of its small size and simple user interface, the SL2 may be the perfect DSLR to buy for a young photographer-in-training.

Summary

Built around an identical sensor and sharing many noteworthy features, the Rebel T7i and SL2 are more similar than they are different. Both deliver very good image quality, feature excellent subject tracking in video mode and offer an intuitive user interface that makes the cameras very easy to use, especially for those with minimal photography experience or otherwise transitioning from a compact camera or a smartphone.

Arguably the Rebel T7i's biggest drawback – its higher price tag – results from the inlcusion of noteworthy features not found in the SL2 (primarily, a much better AF system). For most photographers, the Rebel T7i will fulfill their needs better because of those additional features. But for those who don't need those features, are budget limited or who otherwise value reduced size and weight, the Rebel SL2 remains a viable option.

More Information

• Canon EOS Rebel T7i / 800D Review
• Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons to aid in other purchasing decisions.

The Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D and Rebel T6 / 1300D represent the brand's budget level DSLR offerings, and while high level features are certainly compromised, thankfully, image quality – at least from an APS-C/crop sensor perspective – is not. To aid in your decision making between the two cameras, let's dive into their differences to see which may be the best fit for your needs.

Let's first take a look at the Rebel SL2's advantages in this comparison.

Advantages of the EOS Rebel SL2 over the EOS Rebel T6:

• More resolution: 24.2 MP vs. 18
• DIGIC 7 processor vs. DIGIC 4+
• Evaluative, partial, center-weighted & spot metering vs. evaluative, center-weighted & partial
• Larger ISO range: 100-25600, H:51200 vs. 100-6400, H: 12800
• Larger viewfinder magnification: 0.87x vs. 0.80x
• Vari-angle touchscreen 7.7 cm (3.0"), approx. 1040k dots vs. non-vari-angle, non-touchscreen 7.5cm (3.0") TFT, approx. 920k dots
• Slightly more powerful pop-up flash: 9.8 GN vs. 9.2
• Fine Detail Picture Style vs. N/A
• Continuous shooting (2-10 shots) after 10-second timer vs. N/A
• Faster burst rate: 5 fps vs. 3
• 1080p 60fps vs. 1080p 30fps
• Better Live View focus: Dual Pixel CMOS AF vs. contrast AF
• Timelapse movie recording vs. N/A
• Wi-Fi, NFC & Bluetooth vs. Wi-Fi & NFC
• 3.5mm microphone terminal vs. N/A
• Better battery life: approx. 650 shots vs. 500
• Smaller and lighter: 4.82 x 3.65 x 2.75" (122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8mm), 15.98 oz (453g) vs. 5.08 x 3.99 x 3.06" (129.0 x 101.3 x 77.6mm), 17.1 oz (485g)

And now let's look at the Rebel T6's advantages.

Advantages of the EOS Rebel T6 over the EOS Rebel SL2:

• Faster pop-up flash recycling time: approx 2 sec. vs. 3
• Lower cost

Another difference between the two cameras is that the Rebel SL2 records video in .MP4 format for normal recording (.MOV for timelapses) while the Rebel T6 records in .MOV format. Either format may be a Pro/Con depending on one's desired recording preference.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel SL2

With the Rebel SL2's numerous feature benefits over the Rebel T6, anyone whose budget extends to the SL2 and can shoot with the body comfortably (not necessarily everyone can), the choice is easy – get the Rebel SL2.

Who should opt for the Canon EOS Rebel T6

Considering the Rebel SL2's strong list of advantages over the T6, there are still groups of photographers who may be inclined to purchase Rebel T6 over the SL2, including:

• Those whose budget is a primary limiting factor.
• Those with larger hands who will prefer the T6's larger body.
• Those who will be using the camera in risky situations, such as remote setups or a gifting to a youth photographer-in-training.

Summary

Few camera comparisons are as clear-cut as this one. Almost any of the Rebel SL2's benefits listed above could easily justify its higher, but still-very-reasonable price tag over the Rebel T6, with the sum of those benefits providing an excellent overall value for consumers. However, while the Rebel T6's larger body may be appreciated by select photographers, its very low price tag will likely prove to be the ultimate deciding factor for the majority who add it to their kits, or more likely, begin their photography kits with.

More Information

• Canon EOS Rebel SL2 / 200D Review
• Canon EOS Rebel T6 / 1300D Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons to aid in other purchasing decisions.

If you are currently in the process of upgrading DSLRs, or otherwise looking to add a second camera to your kit, the Canon EOS 6D Mark II and EOS 80D could be prime candidates for consideration.

Many people may be surprised to know just how similar the full-frame 6D Mark II and APS-C sensor 80D really are. Here's a quick rundown of the features these cameras share:

EOS 6D Mark II and 80D Shared Primary Features

• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor
• Compatible with EF, TS-E and MP-E lenses
• AF System: 45 cross-type AF points (27 f/8 points [9 cross-type], center point is f/2.8 and f/5.6 dual cross-type)
• AF Working Range: EV -3 - 18 (at 23 °C & ISO 100)
• Flicker detection and anti-flicker shutter timing
• Autofocus microadjustment
• Up to 1920 x 1080 60fps movie recording
• Movie Servo AF tracking speed and sensitivity adjustment
• Single SD, SDHC or SDXC (UHS-I) memory card slot
• Built-in Wi-Fi and NFC

Now let's take a look at some of the EOS 6D Mark II's advantages in this comparison.

Advantages of the EOS 6D Mark II over the EOS 80D:

• Full-frame sensor
• Higher resolution: 26.2 MP vs. 24.2
• DIGIC 7 processor vs. DIGIC 6
• Spot AF
• Less noise, especially at higher ISOs
• Dual-axis electronic level vs. single-axis
• 4K time-lapse video recording
• Built-in GPS and Bluetooth
• Better battery life: Approx. 1200 vs. 960

And below are the primary advantages the EOS 80D has over its full-frame counterpart.

Advantages of the EOS 80D over the 6D Mark II:

• Compatible with EF-S lenses
• Slightly higher dynamic range
• Slightly faster burst rate / larger buffer: Approx. 7fps, up to 25 images RAW vs. 6.5fps, up to 21 images RAW
• Pop-up flash featuring master functionality
• Faster max shutter speed: 1/8000 sec. vs. 1/4000
• Faster max flash sync speed (x-sync): 1/250 sec vs. 1/180
• Headphone terminal
• Slightly smaller size / weight: 5.47 x 4.14 x 3.09" (139.0 x 105.2 x 78.5mm), 25.75 oz (730g) vs. 5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94" (144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm), 26.98 oz (765g)
• Lower cost

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

If shooting in low light and using relatively high ISOs, the EOS 6D II will give you noticeably cleaner (less noisy) images at the same ISO setting. The full frame sensor will also create a stronger background blur with the same subject framing and aperture in use.

For those interested in movie shooting, the 6D II offers the benefit of in-camera 4K time-lapse recording, although it does not feature a true Tv/Av mode during video recording like most higher-end models (instead, the camera defaults to P mode where both the shutter and aperture are adjusted to maintain exposure) and a headphone socket for audio monitoring is unavailable.

If built-in GPS and Bluetooth are high on your priority list, the 6D II has those features while the 80D does not.

Who should opt for the EOS 80D?

If you are upgrading from an APS-C (crop) sensor camera and currently have several APS-C lenses in your kit, the EOS 80D offers a seamless transition without the need to upgrade your EF-S lenses to full-frame compatible EF lenses, a transition that could prove significantly more costly than a simple camera body upgrade. And the benefits of EF-S lenses include [typically] lower cost and smaller size/weight compared to their full-frame counterparts.

Those shooting fast action may not notice an appreciable difference in the burst rate between the two cameras; however, the larger buffer of the 80D could prove to be a differentiating factor in some situations. The 80D's higher pixel density offering more reach to those requiring longer focal lengths will be especially welcomed by photographers covering long field sports.

The AF point spread of the 80D covers a higher percentage of the viewfinder for optimal framing using traditional phase detect AF, although the use of Live View AF can mitigate the difference between the two bodies.

If you are interested in shooting using off-camera lighting, the 80D's pop-up flash with master functionality means that you may not need a costly accessory to control your off-camera flashes, with the reduced size and weight of your sans-accessory camera being another benefit.

If in-camera 4K time-lapse video is not important to you (you can always create 4K time-lapses in post), the 80D features the same video recording capabilities as the 6D II yet also features a headphone terminal for audio monitoring. Unless filming in low light using high ISOs is necessary for a bulk of your filmmaking, the 80D should work just as well for most with video production aspirations.

Summary

These cameras are actually more similar than they are different, with the sensor size probably being the most significant differentiating factor between the two cameras. If you're eager to enjoy the image quality benefits provided by a full-frame sensor, the 80D's benefits over the 6D Mark II won't likely tip the scales in the smaller sensor camera's direction.

However, if your budget is limited and/or you enjoy the benefits of EF-S lenses, or you otherwise want a body which offers a more versatile sports or video capture platform, the 80D's benefits may make it the logical choice for adding to your kit.

More Information

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review
• Canon EOS 80D Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons to aid in other purchasing decisions.

If you want to reduce the size and weight of your camera, but do not want to give up great image quality, then the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 and EOS M5 will likely be considered prime candidates for incorporating into your camera kit.

First, let's look at some of the primary features these cameras have in common:

• 24.2 MP APS-C Dual Pixel CMOS sensor
• DIGIC 7 processor
• Pop-up flash (no master functionality)
• Native ISO range: 100-25600
• Images/movies stored to SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) memory card
• 1/4000 max shutter speed
• 1/200 flash sync speed
• Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC
• USB 2.0, HDMI (micro) & 3.5mm stereo mini jack

Advantages of the EOS Rebel SL2:

• Natively compatible with EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E lenses
• Ambience / White Priority AWB vs. Ambience only
• Vari-angle touchscreen LCD vs. Tilt-type touchscreen LCD
• Higher built-in flash guide number: 9.8m vs. 5m
• Wider exposure compensation range: +/- 5 stops vs. +/- 3 stops
• Selectable IPB standard / IPB light encoding vs. single in-camera default
• Longer battery life: 650 vs. 395 (420 with Eco Mode On)
• Working humidity: 90% vs. 85%
• Lower price

Advantages of the EOS M5:

• Native EF-M lenses are smaller/lighter than similar EF-S/EF lenses
• More AF Points: 49 vs. 9
• 1/3-stop ISO adjustments vs. full stops
• 100% viewfinder coverage vs. 95%
• Larger LCD screen: 3.2" vs. 3.0"
• Higher burst rate/larger buffer: max 9 fps, up to 17 RAW vs. 5 fps, up to 6 RAW
• Slightly smaller/lighter: 4.6 x 3.5 x 2.4" (115.6 x 89.2 x 60.6mm), 15.1 oz. (427g) vs. 4.82 x 3.65 x 2.75" (122.4 x 92.6 x 69.8mm), 15.98 oz (453g)
• Wider operating range: 14-104°F / -10-40°C vs. 32-104°F / 0-40°C

Who should opt for the EOS Rebel SL2?

If you want a compact camera with a traditional optical viewfinder, there's only one choice in this comparison – get the Rebel SL2. Note, of course, that I didn't list the optical viewfinder (OVF) or the electronic viewfinder (EVF) as an advantage for the respective cameras above; both have advantages and disadvantages compared to the other, so your needs and shooting preferences will ultimately determine which type of viewfinder is right for you.

While those photographing fast action may appreciate some of the M5 advantages over the SL2, the SL2's OVF implementation is better-suited for tracking action while capturing a burst of images.

If you want to create videos with your new camera, both feature Movie Servo AF via Canon's Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor technology, but only the SL2 offers selectable IBP standard and IBP light encoding as well as a vari-angle LCD screen.

Those creating HDRs through manual exposure bracketing will appreciate the SL2's wider exposure compensation range (although the auto exposure bracketing (AEB) spec is the same for both cameras – 3 shots up to +/- 2 stops).

For those who tend to occasionally forget to pack important items in their gear bag, an advantage of the SL2 is its native compatibility with all of Canon's EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses (no adapter required). Those needing to control larger lenses on their camera and those actively using the camera for substantial time periods will appreciate the SL2's more substantial grip.

The Rebel SL2 has one particular advantage that nearly every photographer can appreciate – a significantly lower price compared to the M5.

Who should opt for the EOS M5?

Traveling? The M5 might be the better option for you. Two primary advantages of a mirrorless system are reduced size and weight. While the size and weight differences between these two models are likely not as significant as you might expect, the EOS M5 delivers on both counts. It is the lightest and most compact in this comparison.

EF-M lenses are generally smaller and lighter than their DSLR-compatible counterparts, and the size and weight savings becomes more significant as your kit grows. However, the relatively small number of EF-M lenses (especially those with wide apertures) may prove limiting for some types of photography and if more flexibility is required, the EOS M5 is compatible with all EF, EF-S, TS-E and MP-E lenses when paired with a Canon EF-M Lens Adapter.

Anyone valuing more AF points, a larger AF point spread, faster burst rate, larger buffer and wider operating range will be attracted to the EOS M5.

Summary

When it comes down to it, both of these cameras are smaller and lighter than traditional APS-C DSLR cameras, yet offer the same great image quality you've come to expect from such cameras. With an advanced AF system and the ability to use a wide range of lenses (with an adapter), the M5 will prove to be a compelling choice for many. However, adapting lenses made for DSLRs arguably negates much of the "reduced size and weight" advantage of owning a mirrorless camera and the SL2, with its more substantial grip, permits better, more comfortable control over the camera. Of course, if (or more likely, when) Canon fills out its EF-M lineup offering lenses similar to its EF/EF-S offerings, the size and weight advantages of its mirrorless range will likely be much more significant.

For those that prefer a traditional optical viewfinder, desire a vari-angle LCD or simply want a more compact (and affordable) DSLR, the Rebel SL2 checks all those boxes with a native-mount lens lineup that is sure to meet your needs without the need for an adapter.

More Information:

• Canon EOS Rebel SL2 Review
• Canon EOS M5 Review

See our full list of Camera Gear Comparisons.

When an updated camera model is introduced, it's fair to wonder if your needs will be best served by the new model or whether the older model will serve your intended purposes sufficiently with cost savings being the primary benefit.

With the Canon EOS 6D Mark II's announcement, I'm sure many people are considering either a camera upgrade or the addition of a second camera to their kit. And since the original 6D is still available (at least for now), it makes sense to look closely at these two cameras to see if the 6D II's updated features are worth its higher price for your specific needs.

As the 6D doesn't really have any signifcant advantages over the 6D Mark II aside from a lower price, so we'll simply take a look at the upgraded features of the 6D II to put the current cost differential into context.

Advantages of the EOS 6D Mark II over the 6D:

• 26.2 MP CMOS sensor with Dual Pixel CMOS AF vs. 20.2 MP (no DPAF)
• 45-point AF system (all cross-type) vs. 11 points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• Up to 21 active AF points with f/8 max aperture vs. no active AF points at f/8
• 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor affecting 63 segments vs. 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• 6.5 fps. (up to 21 images in RAW) vs. 4.5fps. (up to 17 images in RAW)
• DIGIC 7 vs. DIGIC 5+
• Customizable, Intelligent Viewfinder with transparent LCD overlay vs. standard viewfinder
• AWB (Ambience priority/White priority) vs. AWB (Ambience priority only)
• Vari-angle touchscreen LCD (1.04 million dots) vs. fixed
• Flicker Light Detection and Shutter Timing vs. none
• Full HD 1080p 60 fps movies with 5 axis electronic image stabilization vs. 1080p 30 fps (no electronic stabilization)
• WiFi, NFC, Bluetooth & GPS vs. WiFi and GPS
• Intervalometer with 4K Timelapse Movie Mode featuring 3840px UHD resolution vs. no intervalometer or in-camera timelapse

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

If you are a wildlife photographer, the 6D II's significantly better AF system and the ability to utilize lens + extender combinations with an f/8 maximum aperture ultimately make it a much better choice compared to the 6D and its 11-point AF system. Those needing to capture wildlife at the peak of action will also benefit from the 6D II's faster burst rate. If sports photography is on your to-do list, then these same features along with Light Flicker Detection and Shutter Timing will be prove quite advantageous to you as well.

Event photographers will especially appreciate the 6D II's upgraded AF system and [almost certain] great image quality at higher ISOs, as both will be very beneficial for documentary style photography in light-starved venues.

Do you plan on photographing your child/children as they play? The 6D II's advanced AF system will ensure you get more in-focus shots compared to its predecessor.

Filmmakers will especially appreciate the 6D II's Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor with its ability to track action in movie mode. Other features that filmmakers will enjoy include the vari-angle LCD (with touch-focus), the ability to capture video at 60 fps and in-camera 4K timelapses (though many may still prefer to compile their timelapses in post-processing). Even if not utilizing the in-camera timelapse movie feature, the built-in intervalometer negates the need for an additional accessory to capture timelapses.

Even if you're not a serious filmmaker, the 6D II's Movie Servo AF can help you to capture high quality home movies that your family will enjoy for years to come.

The customizable Intelligent Viewfinder is a convenient feature that nearly every photographer can appreciate, with the ability to display a single axis level indicator, gridlines or other relevant information. For those who enjoy sharing their images quickly and easily, the 6D II's NFC & low-energy Bluetooth connections may also prove to be a differentiating factor.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D?

If you don't believe the sum of the value of the benefits listed above justify the incrementally higher cost of the 6D Mark II, then the original 6D may be the perfect camera to add to your kit (or otherwise build your kit around). It features excellent full frame image quality and is great for landscapes, cityscapes, architecture/real estate, vacations, family gatherings, studio portraiture and macros.

Summary

The Canon EOS 6D Mark II included a lot of feature updates that 6D owners had been asking for, including (but not limited to) a more advanced AF system and a Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor. The 6D II is intended to be the full frame camera for the budget-conscious consumer, just as the 6D was at its introduction. However, this time around, that same consumer group will be getting a much more versatile camera for their very reasonable investment.

If your budget doesn't extend to the 6D II's introductory price, the 6D is the lowest-priced full frame Canon DSLR on the market right now, and it's well worth the price. However, for a little more, the 6D II is an even better value considering its overall feature set.

Check out our Camera Specifications Tool to fully compare these cameras:

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II compared to the Canon EOS 6D

If you are considering the purchase of a Canon EOS 6D Mark II, you may also be considering the EOS 5D Mark III as they are similarly priced with an also-attractive, mid level feature set within the confines of today's camera market.

Make no mistake, these bodies are similarly versatile and capable cameras, but depending on the intended use and/or photographic challenges being pursued, either one may be a better choice compared to the other. With that said, let's look at how these full frame contenders differ.

Advantages of the EOS 6D Mark II over the 5D Mark III:

• Dual Pixel AF sensor with Movie Servo AF vs. contrast-detect AF in Live View with no Movie Servo AF
• More resolution (26.2 vs. 22.3)
• DIGIC 7 vs. DIGIC 5+
• More sensitive AF (EV -3 – 18 vs. EV -2 – 18)
• More AF points active at f/8 (27 points vs. center AF point with 4 assist points)
• 7560-pixel RGB+IR 63 zone metering sensor vs. iFCL 63-zone Dual-layer sensor
• Faster max burst rate / larger RAW buffer (6.5 fps. (150 images in JPEG, 21 images in RAW) vs. 6 fps. (16,270 images in JPEG, 18 images in RAW))
• Vari-angle LCD vs. fixed
• Flicker detection and corrective shutter release timing
• Ambience priority/white priority AWB vs. ambience priority only
• In-camera 4K UHD time-lapses vs. none
• GPS, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth & NFC vs. none
• Longer battery life (Approx. 1200 (at 23°C, AE 50%, FE 50%) vs. 950)
• Smaller & lighter (5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94" (144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm), 26.98 oz (765g) vs. 6.0 x 4.6 x 3.0" (152 x 116.4 x 76.4mm), 33.5 oz (950g))

Advantages of the EOS 5D Mark III over the 6D Mark II:

• More AF points / more dual cross type points at f/2.8 (61 Point / 41 f/4 cross-type AF points including 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 vs. 45 cross-type AF points including center point dual cross type at f/2.8)
• Joystick multi-controller vs. none
• Larger viewfinder coverage (100% vs. 98%)
• Faster max shutter speed (1/8000 sec vs. 1/4000 sec)
• Dual memory card slots (CF + SDXC/SDHC vs. SDXC/SDHC only)
• HDMI mini, headphone & microphone mini jacks vs. microphone mini jack only

As is evident above, the 6D Mark II has more advantage bullet points compared to the 5D Mark III. However, the importance of some of the 5D III bullet points could easily sway one's decision in favor of the older, economical 5-series body.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

First of all, anyone wanting to quickly create high quality videos with their DSLR will likely prefer the 6D's Movie Servo AF – thanks to its Dual Pixel CMOS AF sensor – as well as its vari-angle LCD. Another nice feature that DSLR filmmakers are likely to appreciate is the 6D II's ability to create 4K UHD time-lapses in-camera, though many filmmakers will prefer to compile their time-lapses in post-processing for more control over the final video (essentially making this feature a less compelling advantage compared to the 5D III).

From a video perspective, one drawback could be the 6D II's .MP4 recording format if someone instead preferred using the .MOV format featured in the 5D III. Another drawback is the 6D II's lack of a headphone jack.

Even though it features fewer overall points, those shooting wildlife will likely prefer the 6D II's slightly faster burst rate and AF system capable of up-to 27 active phase-detect AF points when using lens+extender combinations resulting in an f/8 effective maximum aperture. And on top of that, Live View with subject tracking can be utilized with lens+extender combinations through f/11.

In comparison, only the center AF point (with 4 assist points) is enabled on the 5D III with f/8 maximum apertures and subject tracking is unavailable in Live View. For wildlife photographers who never plan on using lens+extender combinations, the 5D III may be the better choice thanks to its 61 point AF system. But considering how often wildlife photographers utilize extenders, they will likely accept the 6D II's 45 point AF system to gain significantly more AF functionality at f/8.

Those carrying their cameras long distances and/or for long periods of time will of course appreciate the 6D II's smaller design and lighter weight, including (but not limited to) those who are hiking to remote locations or traveling on domestic/international flights.

All photographers will appreciate 6D II's higher resolution and longer battery life, and many will enjoy using its GPS, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and NFC features which are all absent on the 5D III. Any photographers photographing under stadium lights will be thankful for the 6D II's Flicker Detection and corrective shutter timing for avoiding color balancing problems.

Who should opt for the EOS 5D Mark III?

Even though the 5D III seems to have few benefits over the 6D II, the value of some of those benefits can be huge. For instance, anyone photographing once-in-a-lifetime events such as weddings should likely choose the 5D Mark III for its dual memory card feature alone. While card corruption is relatively rare, dual memory card slots provide a vital layer of protection to keep your (or your client's) images safe. Having images backed up in-camera can help you avoid tarnishing your reputation due to a faulty memory card.

Many photographers will appreciate the 5D III's viewfinder with 100% coverage and faster maximum shutter speed.

If you already own a 7D Mark II, you will likely appreciate the very similar controls featured in the 5D III, including (but not limited to) the multi-controller joystick. If keeping the 7D II as a secondary camera, you should be able to switch between bodies without missing a beat.

Summary

Released in 2012, the 5D Mark III still remains relevant in today's camera landscape, although its target market has surely shifted from those needing cutting-edge technology (without stepping up to a 1-series camera) to an enthusiast group wanting full-frame image quality and a more-than-reasonable feature set at an attractive price. And, coincidentally enough, that's a good description of the 6D Mark II as well, although its overall feature set is certainly more contemporary.

As illustrated above, each of these cameras will serve specific photographers' needs better than the other. If you or your business can't afford the ill-effects of a memory card failure, or if the 5D III's controls make it a better fit for your photography, the 6D II's advantages will mean little when adding the 5D III to your shopping cart.

However, with its higher resolution, Dual Pixal CMOS AF sensor, more than sufficient AF system, GPS/wireless features and smaller design/lighter weight, the 6D II will likely be the preferred choice for a large number of photographers.

More Information

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review
• Canon EOS 5D Mark III Review

With the introduction of the Canon EOS 6D Mark II, you may be wondering whether it's an adequate camera for your needs or if the higher end EOS 5D Mark IV is a better fit. Compared to the original 6D, the 6D II goes a long way in closing the feature gap with its 5-series full frame brethren.

Before we analyze the differences between the two bodies, let's first take a look at some of the primary features they have in common:

• Full frame 1.0x 35mm field of view with EF lenses
• Likely excellent high-ISO image quality
• AF working range: EV -3 - 18
• Autofocus Microadjustment
• AEB: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments
• Viewfinder: Pentaprism, approx. 0.71x magnification
• Exposure compensation: +/- 5EV in 1/2 or 1/3 increments
• Auto exposure bracketing (AEB): +/- 3EV in 1/2 or 1/3 increments
• Top LCD Panel: Yes
• Wi-Fi, NFC & GPS: Built-in
• Intervalometer
• Light flicker detection and shutter timing
• Water and dust resistant construction

Now let's take a look at how these DSLR bodies differ.

6D Mark II Advantages over the 5D Mark IV:

• DIGIC 7 processor vs. DIGIC 6+
• Vari-angle LCD (3" 1.04m-Dot vari-angle touchscreen LCD vs. Fixed touch screen 3.2" approx. 1.62m dots)
• Bluetooth vs. none
• 4K time-lapse movies vs. 1080p only time-lapse movies
• Smaller, lighter (5.67 x 4.35 x 2.94" (144.0 x 110.5 x 74.8mm), 26.98 oz (765g) vs. 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm), 31.4 oz (890g))
• Lower price

5D IV Advantages over the 6D Mark II

• Higher resolution (30.4 MP vs. 26.2)
• Better metering (Approx. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering. EOS Intelligent Subject Analysis system vs. 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor with the area divided into 63 segments)
• More AF points and wider point coverage
• Faster max shutter speed (1/8000 sec vs. 1/4000)
• Slightly higher burst rate (7fps vs. 6.5)
• Dual memory card slots (CF + SDHC/SDXC vs. SDHC/SDXC)
• 4K video recording
• Selectable .MOV or .MP4 video formats vs. .MP4 recording with .MOV available only in time-lapse movie mode
• Multi-controller joystick

Note: The advantages listed above should not be considered an exhaustive list, but instead represent some primary differences between the cameras.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D Mark II?

If you are stepping up from an entry level EOS Rebel/****D/***D/**D/7-series camera, the 6D Mark II will offer at least one big feature you didn't have in your previous camera – a full frame sensor. But depending on the model being displaced in your kit, the 6D Mark II may offer a wide variety of feature upgrades that make it an attractive primary camera for your needs, especially for the price.

If you already own a recent 1-series or 5-series DSLR, the 6D Mark II should prove to be a great backup camera that's more compact and easier on the budget compared to a new/retail duplicate of your existing camera.

And while we're on the subject of the camera's size and weight, anyone who is traveling to remote locations with the responsibility of carrying their camera kit on their backs for long distances and/or long periods of time will certainly appreciate the 6D II's smaller dimensions and lighter weight.

Who should opt for the 5D Mark IV?

While the 6D Mark II can easily produce professional-looking results from an image quality and AF perspective, its lack of dual memory card slots may make it a less ideal choice for those who are shooting once-in-a-lifetime imagery (think, weddings). And with a more advanced AF system (with more points and more coverage), you can expect the 5D IV to perform a little better in challenging AF conditions or when framing subjects closer to the edges of the viewfinder.

If you are primarily interested in video filming with your DSLR, the 5D IV offers more video features – including 4K recording – that will make it a much better option compared to the 6D Mark II.

Summary

The 6D Mark II represents a huge step up from its predecessor, and its upgraded features along with a budget-friendly price make the 6D II an incredible value in Canon's DSLR lineup. For those that don't require the extra features found in the 5D IV, the 6D II should prove proficient at tackling most photographic challenges with ease.

But for those who need an edge in AF performance, dual memory card slots and 4K recording, the 5D Mark IV is your camera.

More Information

• Canon EOS 6D Mark II Review
• Canon 5D Mark IV Review

The release of the Sony a9 introduced yet another intriguing option in the pro sports photography market. As such, you may be curious as to how Sony's first sports-oriented mirrorless full frame camera stacks up against Canon's top-of-the-line full frame DSLR, the EOS-1D X Mark II.

Let's first take a look at some of the high level features where the two cameras differ to see how they contrast with one another:

Size, Weight and Battery Life

As indicated by the table above, the Sony a9 is smaller and lighter than the Canon 1D X II. And as also evidenced by the table above, a downside to the smaller body is the inability to house a large battery. In other words, you can likely shoot more than twice as many images with the [significantly larger] 1D X II before the battery is exhausted. Adding a battery grip to the a9 doubles battery capacity and adds the extremely useful vertical control buttons, but inevitably reduces the size and weight advantages of the camera.

Native Lens Lineup

Consider that the EOS-1D X II is Canon's 11th 1-series digital SLR, the long-standing camera maker has had plenty of time to fill out its product line with a wide variety of lenses ideal for sports photography. Aside from the general purposes lenses sometimes used for sports photography, Canon telephoto (and telephoto zoom) lenses often used for sports photography include:

• Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM
• Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM
• Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Ext 1.4x
• Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM
• Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
• Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM
• Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM
• Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
• Canon EF 500mm f/4L IS II USM
• Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II USM
• Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM

Compare the lens selection above to the Sony E-mount lenses available now with a focal length of 300mm or greater:

• Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS
• Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS

Sony likely has several long telephoto lenses currently in development. However, it's very difficult [i.e., impossible] to take great sports images with lenses that are simply unavailable. For the meantime, Canon likely has a lens to cover your sports needs, no matter what sport you're photographing.

Of course, you can use non-native lenses with the Sony a9 when adapters are thrown into the mix. However, expect the AF performance of adapted lenses to be negatively impacted.

Viewfinders

Viewfinder implementations differ significantly between the Canon 1D X II and the Sony a9, where the Canon body offers a traditional optical viewfinder (with customizable overlays) and the Sony body features an electronic viewfinder. Each type of viewfinder has benefits and drawbacks compared to the other (such as an EVF's elimination of viewfinder blackout times), and Bryan shared his thoughts on the advantages/disadvantages of electronic/optical viewfinders in his article, "Comparing Electronic Viewfinders to Optical Viewfinders" . Be sure to check out the preceeding information to determine which of these systems you may prefer.

Durability & Reliability

With Canon's tendency to be relatively conservative regarding its 1-series updates, it's safe to say that you can expect their top-of-the-line series to perform reliably in the field, with robust weather sealing keeping the camera operational in adverse conditions.

Indeed, the a9 isn't Sony's first foray into the full frame digital camera market. However, it is the first camera Sony has designed specifically for sports photography and the rigors that pursuit entails. The Sony a9 may prove to be as reliable as the 1D X II, but... the first iteration of a company's product line is rarely as refined a competitor's benefitting from many more years of experience in design and manufacture.

While we didn't stress test the camera, the Sony a9 with its magnesium alloy frame and weather sealing is designed for the rigors that professionals encounter. Three hours of clay dust created at a dirt track sprint car race turned the camera red, but this issue was completely mitigated by an air blower.

Autofocus Performance

Based on our tests, the Sony a9 focuses in extremely low light, similar to the 1D X II. Focus accuracy in One Shot mode/ AF-S single focus lock is also very similar between the cameras, although the 1D X II is noticeably faster in One Shot AF mode as the a9 defocuses before focusing again even when the subject has not moved. With subjects moving at a constant rate of speed, the a9 does an excellent job of tracking subjects. However, from our experience, the 1D X II tends to track erratic subjects better and maintains subject tracking as those subjects get closer to the camera.

Of course, it's impossible to perform a complete, exhaustive, apples-to-apples comparison between the two cameras' AF systems because conditions are never precisely repeatable. It's possible that either camera’s AF performance could be situationally improved by adjusting the focusing parameters from the default settings.

Customer Support

Canon is widely recognized as having an excellent support system, including (not not limited to) Canon Professional Services, the division which specifically caters to those who make a living with their imaging gear. The support we have received from Canon USA and Canon Professional Services has over the years has been very good. Canon USA's Customer Service Technicians have been eager to help and knowledgeable when we have needed phone support, and our experience with Canon's repair department (in the few times we've needed a repair) has been equally satisfying.

On the other hand, Sony is still in the building process when it comes to customer support for their E-mount camera system. As such, they don't necessarily have a reputation for exemplary customer service [yet]. And that reputation (or lack thereof) is seemingly appropriate, at least considering our own [minimal] experience with Sony Support.

Price

At the time of this comparison, the Sony a9's MSRP is 25% lower than the Canon EOS 1D X Mark II's MSRP, and that translates to a not-so-insignificant savings. If you're ready for the Sony a9 ecosystem, that savings will certainly be appreciated. For a more versatile, similar-to-a-1D-X-II setup, you may wish to use some of the savings to pick up the Sony VG-C3EM Vertical Grip and an extra battery for increased shooting time and better handling with larger lenses.

Unfortunately, your savings experienced by purchasing a Sony a9 may be negated as your lens kit grows, as comparable Sony lenses tend to be more expensive than their Canon counterparts. Check out the Sony a9 vs. Canon EOS 1D X II vs. Nikon D5 price comparison table near the end of the a9 review.

Wrap-Up

So which pro sports camera body is best for your needs? Well, if you're planning on making a living shooting sports imagery in the very near future, or you've already invested heavily in a Canon system, the EOS-1D X Mark II would likely be the best choice.

However, if you're a semi pro or enthusiast sports shooter, and you haven't already invested heavily in a particular camera system, the Sony a9 shows obvious potential and is definitely worth considering if its current lens lineup is appropriate for your needs.

Suggested Retailers

Canon EOS-1D X Mark II – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic
Sony a9 – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic

If you currently have a Rebel/***D or **D series camera, the Canon EOS 6D and EOS 80D are logical upgrade candidates you may be considering. Or, if you already own a 1D-series or 5D-series camera, the 6D or 80D may be considered for backup purposes. Either way, while they share a similar size and weight, they are very different cameras from a features standpoint. Let's take a look at these two DSLR bodies to see which upgrade/backup option may be right for your needs.

First, let's consider the EOS 6D's benefits over the 80D:

• Full frame sensor capable of cleaner imagery at higher ISOs and stronger a background blur
• Larger ISO range: Auto (100-25600), 100-25600, L: 50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400 vs. Auto (100-16000), 100-16000, H1: 25600
• Built-in GPS vs. optional accessory
• Slightly higher battery life: Approx. 1090 (at 23°C, AE 50%, FE 50%) vs. 960

And here are the EOS 80D's advantages over the 6D:

• Higher resolution: 24.2 MP vs. 20.2
• Compatability with EF-S lenses
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor
• Pop-up master flash vs. No flash
• Ambience priority / White priority AWB vs. Ambience only
• Touch screen Vari-angle 7.7cm (3.0") 3:2 Clear View II TFT LCD vs. fixed LCD
• Headphone socket vs. None
• More powerful image processing: DIGIC 6 vs. DIGIC 5+
• More advanced AF system: 45-point all cross-type AF (f/2.8 dual cross-type AF point at center, 27 active AF points at f/8) vs. 11 points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• Newer/more advanced metering system: 7560-pixel RGB+IR 63 zone vs. 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• Faster continuous shooting and larger RAW buffer: Max 7 fps (110 JPEG, 25 RAW) vs. 4.5 fps (1250 JPEG, 17 RAW)
• Faster max. shutter speed: 1/8000 sec. vs. 1/4000
• Larger viewfinder coverage: 100% vs. 97%
• More movie encoding options: .MOV & .MP4 (max. 1920 x 1080 [59.94, 50 fps] inter-frame) vs. .MOV (max. 1920 x 1080 [29.97, 25 fps] intra or inter frame), no .MP4 option
• Built-in Wi-Fi and NFC vs. Wi-Fi only
• Lower price

Essentially, you're looking at a comparison between Canon's low-end, budget conscious full-frame camera and their mid-range APS-C model. As evidenced by the above lists of advantages, the 80D provides a notable superset of features over 6D.

Who should opt for the EOS 6D?

If you are looking for the absolute best image quality, especially at higher ISOs, you will certainly benefit from the 6D's full frame sensor. If who want a true 35mm angle of view from Canon's EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses, the choice is easy – get the 6D. The 6D makes for an excellent dedicated studio/portraiture/landscape body.

Who should opt for the EOS 80D?

With many features not included in the EOS 6D, the 80D could be considered a more general purpose camera in this comparison. And if you're upgrading from another APS-C body, the 80D allows for a seamless transition because of its compatibility with designed-for-crop-sensor, EF-S lenses, while still being compatible with EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses.

If you shoot sports or wildlife, the 80D's advanced AF system, faster 7 fps burst rate, larger RAW continuous shooting buffer and 27 active AF points at f/8 will prove advantageous. And with the 80D's more pixel dense sensor, you'll have much more resolution when compared to taking the same image at the same shooting location with the 6D and cropping to the equivalent 1.6x focal length. If you're interested in filmmaking with your DSLR, the 80D's expanded movie options, headphone socket and excellent Dual Pixel CMOS AF – allowing for superb focus tracking in movie mode – are huge benefits.

Summary

As is typical of Canon DSLRs, either one of these cameras can be employed to create stunning imagery. Your personal priorities and intended subject matter will ultimately determine which of these bodies is the best investment for capitalizing on your photographic opportunities. Hopefully, the comparison above has provided some insight into which of these bodies is the right addition for your camera kit. If not, check out our full reviews for more in-depth information on these (and many more) cameras.

Shopping Links

Canon EOS 6D – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic
Canon EOS 80D – B&H | Amazon | Adorama | Wex Photographic

With a feature set tailor-made for general purpose use, it's no wonder that there are several Canon-mount 24-105mm lenses available for your consideration. But with so many options available, it can be confusing when trying to determine which 24-105mm zoom lens is the best choice for your particular needs. And considering that most of these lenses share a majority of significant specifications, including focal length range (FLR), max aperture (except for one), and built-in stabilization, it's easy to see why singling out the right lens could be a challenging endeavor.

With that in mind, let's dig into the differences between these very popular lenses to see which one might make the best addition to your kit.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Lens

Announced in August 2016, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM is the newest lens in this comparison. As such, you may expect this lens to outperform the rest of the pack in just about every measureable way, having benefitted from the latest and greatest technological advancements. However, this lens' superiority is not so clear-cut.

From a sharpness perspective, the 24-105L IS II is very similar to its predecessor, a lens that was released 11 years prior to version II's introduction.

While that may sound a bit disappointing, keep in mind that the 24-104L IS USM was no slouch when it came to sharpness and version II brought forth other advancements – leading to reduced vignetting, distortion and flare – which adds up to an overall better image quality. IQ aside, version II also benefitted from build quality and design refinements as well as an upgraded Image Stabilization system capable of 4-stops of compensation (compared to version I's 3-stops). The 24-105L IS II is weather sealed, making it a great option for those who intend on photographing in inclement weather.

In other words, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM may not be significantly better than its predecessor, but with all things considered, it is indeed better. And considering that it debuted sporting an only slightly higher price than its predecessor, this lens provides an excellent standard (from performance and value standpoints) by which all other lenses in this category can be compared.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Lens

Released in 2005, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM was the default full frame kit lens for more than a decade. As such, there are likely more 24-105Ls in the marketplace than any other L-series lens. Its versatility, reasonable price (especially if purchased via a white box sale) and solid performance made this an ideal general purpose lens for many photographers.

As mentioned above, the original 24-105L competes quite well from a sharpness perspective in regards to its predecessor. However, it does show more vignetting, distortion and flare compared to the same lens. Of course the 24-105L features a more classic design, but a more significant difference between it and its predecessor, as noted, is its 3-stop IS system compared to version II's upgraded 4-stop IS system. Like its successor, the 24-105L is also weather sealed (though a front filter is required for optimal sealing).

With version II becoming more widely available, though, you can expect the original version of the lens to be phased out in the not-so-distant future. This lens represents an excellent deal – especially when white box and grey market versions are considered – while it remains available.

Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG OS HSM Art Lens

Announced in 2013, the 24-105 Art lens became Sigma's first stabilized full-format general purpose zoom lens. With a sleek design, high build quality, good image quality and a reasonable price, the 24-105 Art epitomizes the hallmarks of Sigma's Global Vision series of lenses.

With major features like focal length range, maximum aperture and built-in stabilization similar to the Canon L-series lenses, the Sigma represents an excellent value relative to its peers.

Compared to the 24-105 L II, the Sigma is slightly heavier, similar in size and lower priced. The Sigma has a higher MM (0.30x vs 0.24) to its advantage.

In the image quality comparison between the Art-series lens and the 24-105L II, we see the Sigma turning in slightly sharper results at the wide end, the two being very similar over most of the focal length range and the Canon taking the advantage at the long end. At 24mm, the Sigma has less CA and slightly more barrel distortion. The Sigma has slightly more vignetting at 24mm and modestly more at the long end. The Sigma is slightly more prone to flare.

We were pleased to find the Sigma 24-105 Art's AF performance to be quite good (often an issue with third-party lenses). It's not as fast as the Canon L-series lenses, but AF accuracy proved to be – for the most part – reliable in One Shot and AI Servo mode.

One drawback of the Sigma 24-105 Art – a lack of weather sealing – means that those photographers intending on photographing in adverse weather conditions may be better served by one of the Canon L-series options.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens

The Canon EF 24-105mm IS STM lens was announced in 2014 and, being a full-frame compatible lens with STM, foreshadowed the introduction Dual Pixel AF in Canon's future full-frame camera lineup (although it would be another 16 months before the EOS-1D X Mark II was announced).

Without the Luxury branding of a red ring around the end of the lens, it would be reasonable to expect the 24-105 IS STM to feature a lower build quality, inferior image quality and a lower price. In this case, however, only two out of three expectations would come to turn out to be definitively accurate.

The 24-105 IS STM indeed features a lower build quality and a lower price tag compared to its red-ringed counterparts, but... it performs competitively in regards to sharpness, vignetting, distortion and flare. Depending on which focal length and aperture you choose in the comparison between the 24-105 IS STM and 24-105L IS II, either could be slightly better than the other. As such, image quality alone should not be considered a primary differentiating factor.

Comparing the lenses further, the STM has less CA at 24mm and has slightly less pincushion distortion at mid and long focal lengths compared to the 24-105L IS II. The L lens has a wider aperture over the 42-105mm range, but the STM has a 1/3 stop advantage for a few mms (24-27mm) and has a higher MM (0.30x vs 0.24). The 24-105 IS STM is not a weather sealed lens and does not have a focus distance window.

Now would be a good time to address the elephant in the room – the 24-105 IS STM's variable max aperture with a 1-stop narrower max aperture (from 67-105mm) compared to the rest of the lenses mentioned above. This means that you'll need twice as much light using the same ISO and shutter speed with the 24-105 IS STM compared to using one of the f/4 max aperture lenses above (or to put it another way, you'll need a shutter speed twice as long or a 1-stop higher ISO to achieve the same exposure). The 1-stop narrower aperture can be especially detrimental if photographing in dimly-lit conditions.

On the plus side, the 24-105 IS STM includes Canon's stepping motor-driven AF system which allows for smooth and nearly silent autofocusing in video mode, a valuable feature for DSLR filmmakers.

Size and Weight

As is evident by the image atop this post, the Canon 24-105L IS II is the longest lens in this comparison, the Sigma 24-105 Art is the widest and the 24-105 IS STM is the shortest. Indiscernible by the picture, the Sigma Art lens is also the heaviest.

While there are minor differences, as reiterated throughout this comparison, image quality is not likely a determining factor when deciding among these lenses. As such, other factors – such as max aperture, image stabilization performance, weather sealing and price – become more prominent factors.

With all things considered, most will find the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM to be the best fit for their needs as long as the budget stretches to its (very reasonable) price tag. If the budget is limited, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG HSM Art remain very solid options, with the Canon lens being our preference thanks to its weather sealed design. On the other hand, if DSLR filmmaking is a high priority, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM will likely be the best choice, forgoing the f/4 constant maximum aperture in favor of a smooth and quiet AF system.

Those looking to invest in a 400mm telephoto lens have a several options available for consideration. One such option available is the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens. And while the telephoto zoom is certainly a versatile option, opting for a 400mm prime lens over the zoom alternative will typically either a) give you a wider maximum aperture at that particular focal length or b) save you some cash (but unfortunately, those benefits seem to be mutually exclusive).

Before we get started, it's important to note that I wouldn't necessarily consider wide-open image quality to be a differentiating factor among the 400mm prime lenses in this comparison. While there are certainly differences, all perform very well. With that in mind, let's take a look at the notable benefits/drawbacks associated with each of the 400mm prime candidates.

The Canon EF 400 f/2.8L IS II USM is the biggest, heaviest and priciest 400mm prime option. However, there's another "-est" descriptor that justifies this lens' price tag for many professional photographers – "widest." The 400L IS II's f/2.8 maximum aperture is 2-stops wider than most zoom lenses including the 400mm focal length, and 1-stop wider than the formidable EF 400mm DO IS II model. This lens is unparalleled when action stopping shutter speeds are necessary, especially in locations where the available light is less than abundant. Of course, the background blur at f/2.8 is noticeably stronger than it is at f/4 or f/5.6, with the benefit of stronger subject isolation. As you might expect, this lens is built for the needs of professionals with weather sealing and excellent AF performance.

Speaking of AF, a 3-position focus limiter switch allows focusing distances to be limited to a specific distance range - or to be unlimited: 8.85' - 23' (2.7m - 7m), 23' (7m) - ∞, 8.85' (2.7m) - ∞. Limiting the focus distance range can improve focus lock times and reduce focus hunting. Autofocus Stop buttons near the objective lens allow autofocus to be temporarily stopped. The Autofocus Stop feature makes it easy to obtain focus lock, turn off autofocus and recompose for a framing that places the active focus point(s) off of the subject.

The 400L IS II features a 4-stop IS (image stabilization) system with normal, panning and tracking modes available (Modes 1, 2 & 3 respectively). And while I mentioned image quality wasn't necessarily a differentiating factor in this comparison, the 400 f/2.8L IS II edges out the other two in most regards.

As noted, a high price isn't the only compromise one must accept to gain a wide, f/2.8 aperture at this focal length; consequently, this lens is neither small nor light. With the hood installed, the 400L IS II weighs in at 143.7 oz (4070g) with and is 7.68 x 13.8" (195.1 x 350.5mm) with the hood reversed for storage. While this lens can be used handheld, most will likely need a solid tripod or, at the very least, a monopod for comfortable medium-to-long-term use. Support/stabilizing gear necessary for long-term use will of course add to the size and weight storage/transport requirements when traveling with the lens.

If price is no object and small size and weight are not priorities, this is the ultimate 400mm option.

It's not often that a lens measuring 6.32 x 9.45” (160.45 x 240.13mm) and weighing in at 80 oz (2265g) (with hood) can be considered small and lightweight, but... everything is relative. Compared to its massive f/2.8 big brother, the Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Lens' size and weight are quite manageable considering its focal length and f/4 max. aperture, allowing for much longer periods of handheld use before fatigue takes its toll. This lens' diffractive optics elements allow for a very compact design that sports and wildlife photographers will especially appreciate.

The 400 DO IS II features a 3-position focus limiter switch with the following settings: 10.8' - 26.2' (3.3m - 8m), 26.2' - 8 (8m - ∞) and 10.8' - ∞ (3.3m - ∞). Autofocus Stop buttons are also included near the objective lens and allow autofocus to be temporarily stopped. Like the 400 f/2.8L IS II, the 400 DO IS II is weather sealed and features a 3-Mode, 4-stop IS system.

While an f/4 maximum aperture may not be considered "wide," the moderately-wide max. aperture combined with this lens' IS system makes for a very versatile tool that's reasonably sized for handheld shooting. Bird, wildlife and sports photographers will often forgo the f/2.8 maximum aperture to enjoy the smaller size, weight and price benefits associated with the f/4 DO IS II option.

Representing the lowest tier in Canon's 400mm primes in size, weight, max. aperture and price is the Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM. Note that I didn't list "image quality" in the preceding list as the 400 f/5.6L is no slouch from an image quality perspective. That a lens designed nearly 25 years ago can perform compete so well with the 400L IS II (released only 6 years ago) is impressive, to say the least.

The most alluring aspects of the 400 f/5.6L, aside from the focal length shared by the other lenses in this comparison, are its small size, light weight and comparatively low price. The 400 f/5.6L measures 3.54 x 10.44” (90.04 x 265.17mm) (with hood unextended) and weighs in at only 47.7 oz (1351g). While the 400 DO IS II is shorter with its hood reversed, the 400 f/5.6L's diameter is significantly smaller and it weighs 32.3 oz (915.7g) less than the DO II model, making it significantly easier to travel with and use handheld for long periods of time.

On the downside, image stabilization is not a feature of this lens and it is only partially weather sealed (a lens mount gasket is not present, but the switches and focusing ring have moderate dust and moisture resistance). The lack of IS means that notably higher shutter speeds (up to 4-stops greater) will need to be utilized to negate camera shake compared to the other lenses mentioned above.

And speaking of the sealed switches, this lens only has two: an autofocus/manual focus switch and a focus limiter switch with settings of 11.48' (3.5m) - ∞ and 27.89' (8.5m) - ∞.

Without IS and a wider maximum aperture, the f/5.6 model's high image quality combined with its low price will represent the primary reasons why photographers choose it over one of the other 400mm prime options as well as the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM (which features the same max. aperture at 400mm).

Size Comparison Images

While I mentioned the sizes of the lenses detailed above, the comparison images below will put those numbers into relative context. The first image (also displayed atop this post) shows the lenses in their ready-for-the-gear-bag form with hoods reversed (or not extended).

As I mentioned in the introductory paragraph, while there are certainly small differences in image quality (including sharpness, vignetting, flare and [less so] distortion), most will not consider IQ to be a differentiating factor between the 400mm prime candidates listed above. Instead, the significant differences in price found in the available choices directly correlates to the max. apertures available, the inclusion of image stabilization and (to some extent) the amount of weather sealing featured in the lens' design. Ultimately, your max. aperture needs, size/weight requirements and budget limitations will be the most important factors in determining which of these lenses is the ideal addition for your kit.

Purchase Links

Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens – B&H | Amazon | Adorama
Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Lens – B&H | Amazon | Adorama
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens – B&H | Amazon | Adorama

Rental Links

Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens – LensRentals | LensProToGo
Canon EF 400mm f/4 DO IS II USM Lens – LensRentals | LensProToGo
Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM Lens – LensRentals | LensProToGo

If you currently have a Rebel/***D or **D series camera, the Canon EOS 6D and EOS 7D Mark II will likely be considered prime upgrade candidates as you look to expand your imaging capabilities. As such, let's take a look at these two DSLR bodies to see which upgrade option may be right for your needs.

First, let's take a quick look at the EOS 6D's benefits over the 7D Mark II:

• Full frame sensor capable of cleaner imagery at higher ISOs
• Larger ISO range: Auto (100-25600), 100-25600, L: 50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400 vs. Auto (100-16000), 100-16000, H1: 25600, H2: 51200
• Built-in Wi-Fi
• Higher battery life: Approx. 1090 (at 23°C, AE 50%, FE 50%) vs. 670
• Slightly smaller/lighter: 5.7 x 4.4 x 2.8" (144.5 x 110.5 x 71.2mm), 26.6 oz (755g) vs. 5.85 x 4.43 x 3.08" (148.6 x 112.4 x 78.2mm), 32.10 oz (910g)

Now let's check out the EOS 7D Mark II's benefits over the 6D:

• Compatability with EF-S lenses
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF Sensor
• Pop-up master flash vs. No flash
• Headphone socket vs. None
• Multi-controller joystick & AF area selector vs. None
• More powerful image processing: Dual DIGIC 6 vs. DIGIC 5+
• More advanced AF system: 65-point all cross-type AF (f/2.8 dual cross-type AF point at center) vs. 11 points (f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8)
• More advanced metering system: 252 zone Dual Layer SPC vs. 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• More sensitive metering range: EV 0 – 20 (at 73°F/23°C and ISO 100) vs. EV 1 – 20
• Faster continuous shooting and larger buffer: Max 10 fps (infinite JPEG, 31 RAW) vs. 4.5 fps (1250 JPEG, 17 RAW)
• Faster max. shutter speed: 1/8000 sec. vs. 1/4000
• Larger viewfinder coverage: 100% vs. 97%
• More movie encoding options: .MOV & .MP4 (max. 1920 x 1080 [59.94, 50 fps] inter-frame) vs. .MOV (max. 1920 x 1080 [29.97, 25 fps] intra or inter frame), no .MP4 option
• Faster Interface: SuperSpeed USB 3.0 vs. Hi-Speed USB 2.0
• Dual Memory Cards: CompactFlash (UDMA 7 compatible) & SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) vs. SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) only

At the heart of it, you're looking at a comparison between Canon's low-end, budget conscious full-frame camera and their high-end, top-of-the-line APS-C model. Based on Canon's historical naming conventions, the camera bodies' names suggest the the EOS 6D is placed just above the 7D Mark II in the lineup spectrum, but that's simply a sensor-based categorization. Otherwise, as is clearly evident, the 7D Mark II provides a significant superset of features over 6D.

There are two key differentiators that usually appear in our camera comparisons – resolution and price – which remain unlisted above. In this case, these attributes fail to be differentiating factors between these particular cameras. Both DSLRs feature the same 20.2 MP resolution (although the 6D's sensor is larger, providing a larger pixel pitch) and both are priced similarly (the 7D II's MSRP is $100.00 USD higher, although instant and/or mail-in rebates can level out pricing).

Who should opt for the EOS 6D?

If you are looking for the absolute best image quality, especially at higher ISOs, you will certainly benefit from the 6D's full frame sensor. If who want a true 35mm angle of view from Canon's EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses, the choice is easy – get the 6D. If you want built-in Wi-Fi, the EOS 7D Mark II doesn't have it; the 6D does. The 6D makes for an excellent dedicated studio/portraiture body. Although the 6D is slightly smaller and lighter than the 7D II, I wouldn't necessarily consider it compelling differentiator between the two bodies.

Who should opt for the EOS 7D Mark II?

With a myriad of features not included in the EOS 6D, the 7D Mark II could be considered the jack-of-all-trades in this comparison. And if you're upgrading from another APS-C body, the 7D II allows for a seamless transition because of its compatibility with designed-for-crop-sensor, EF-S lenses, while still being compatible with EF, TS-E & MP-E lenses.

If you shoot sports or wildlife, you'll love the 7D II's advanced AF system and substantially faster 10 fps burst rate. If you're interested in filmmaking with your DSLR, the 7D II's expanded movie options, headphone socket and excellent Dual Pixel CMOS AF – allowing for superb focus tracking in movie mode – are huge benefits.

Aside from the advanced AF system, faster burst rate and impressive movie options, the 7D II's dual memory card slots is another feature that I consider to be a significant benefit over the 6D. The extra memory card slot provides the benefit of redundancy should a memory card become corrupted (or otherwise unavailable due to forgetfulness). If redundancy is not needed, the extra memory card slot can provide up to twice the storage available for use. And if the benefits of redundant/more storage are deemed unnecessary, you can always throw a Canon W-E1 Wireless Adapter in the SD card slot for the benefits it provides.

Summary

As is typical of Canon DSLRs, each of these cameras can easily be utilized to create stunning imagery. Your personal priorities and intended subject matter will ultimately determine which of these bodies is the best investment for capitalizing on your photographic opportunities. Hopefully, the comparison above has provided some insight into which of these bodies is the right addition for your camera kit. If not, check out Bryan's full reviews for more in-depth information on these (and many more) cameras.

If stepping up from a crop sensor camera like the EOS 80D or a Rebel-series camera, there are two full frame Canon DSLRs outside of the 1-series that one might consider – the EOS 5D Mark IV and EOS 6D. Both offer a step up in high ISO image quality afforded by a larger full frame sensor, but feature gap between them is as significant as the price gap. Let's dig a little deeper to see which body might be the better option for your needs and budget.

Before we analyze the differences between the two bodies, let's first take a look at the features they have in common:

• Full frame 1.0x 35mm field of view with EF lenses
• Excellent high-ISO image quality
• AF working range: EV -3 - 18
• Autofocus Microadjustment
• AEB: 2, 3, 5 or 7 Shots +/-3 EV 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments
• Viewfinder: Pentaprism, approx. 0.71x magnification
• Exposure compensation: +/- 3EV in 1/2 or 1/3 increments
• Top LCD Panel: Yes
• Wi-Fi and GPS: Built-in

From an image quality perspective (assuming a properly in-focus subject), the two bodies perform very similarly (disregarding differences in resolution). And from that standpoint, either body can serve as a very compelling upgrade for those stepping up from a 1.6x crop sensor camera like the **D or Rebel/***D/****D series. With that in mind, let's take a look at the specific benefits of each DSLR.

Benefits of the Canon EOS 6D over the 5D Mark IV

• Smaller size/lower weight: 5.7 x 4.4 x 2.8" (144.5 x 110.5 x 71.2mm), 26.6 oz (755g) vs. 5.9 x 4.6 x 3.0" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm), 31.4 oz (890g)
• Better battery life: Approx 1090 shots vs. 900 (at 23°C/73°F, AE 50%, FE 50%)
• Significantly lower price

Benefits of the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV over the EOS 6D

• More resolution: 30.4 MP vs. 20.2
• Newer image processor: DIGIC 6+ vs. DIGIC 5+
• Dual Pixel CMOS AF: Yes vs. No
• Better AF system: 61 Point / max of 41 cross-type AF points inc. 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 and 61 points / 21 cross-type AF points at f/8 vs. 11 points inc. f/5.6 cross type at center, extra sensitivity at f/2.8
• Better metering system: Approx. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering vs. TTL full aperture metering with 63 zone Dual Layer SPC
• Higher Metering Range: EV 0 – 20 vs. EV 1 – 20
• Higher max. shutter speed: 1/8000 sec vs. 1/4000
• Faster continuous shooting/higher buffer: Max. approx. 7fps. with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to unlimited number of JPEGs or 21 RAW images vs. max. approx. 4.5fps. with full AF / AE tracking, speed maintained for up to 1250 JPEGs or 17 RAW images
• More memory card slots: 2 (CompactFlash, SD/SDHC/SDXC) vs. 1 (SD/SDHC/SDXC)
• Selectable auto white balance setting: AWB (ambience priority, white priority) vs. AWB (ambience priority)
• Larger viewfinder coverage: Approx. 100% vs. 97%
• Better mirror assembly: Motor driven quick-return half mirror vs. quick-return half mirror
• Higher shutter durability rating: 150,000 shots vs. 100,000
• Light flicker detection and shutter timing: Yes vs. No
• Better LCD: Touch screen 3.2" (8.10cm) Clear View LCD II, approx. 1620K dots vs. 3.0" (7.7cm) Clear View TFT, approx. 1040K dots
• Slightly faster flash sync speed: 1/200 sec. vs. 1/180 sec.
• Higher max. movie resolution and frame rates: 4K (17:9) 4096 x 2160 (29.97, 25, 24, 23.98 fps) Motion JPEG, FHD (16:9) 1920 x 1080 (59.94, 50, 29.97, 25, 23.98 fps) intra or inter frame vs. FHD (16:9) 1920 x 1080 (29.97, 25, 23.976 fps) intra or inter frame
• NFC: Yes vs. No
• Faster interface: SuperSpeed USB 3.0 vs. Hi-Speed USB 2.0
• Headphone socket: Yes vs. No

While it's obvious from above that the EOS 5D Mark IV is a full featured, advanced DSLR with numerous benefits over the 6D, the 5D IV's superior feature set results in a significant price differential in respect to Canon's entry-level full frame DSLR. How significant? Considering current manufacturer suggested retail pricing (without rebates), you could purchase two Canon EOS 6D DSLRs in place of a single 5D Mark IV (and still have a little money left over).

It's difficult to deny that the 5D IV is a general purpose powerhouse, with the ability to cover a wide range of situations including sports (thanks to its faster frame rate & flicker avoidance), wildlife (due to the advanced AF system and cropping ability afforded by its higher resolution), architecture, portraiture, event photography and... well, just about everything else. But if you're upgrading to a full frame camera for the first time, or otherwise are looking to add a backup camera to your full frame capable kit, then the EOS 6D represents an excellent value for the feature set it does have and the image quality it is capable of.

Of course, the 5D IV would be an easy recommendation for many enthusiast/advanced/pro photographers. However, one's budget and primary photographic disciplines must be considered. For instance, if you're a wedding photographer, you could easily make the case for investing in two EOS 6D bodies rather than purchasing on a single EOS 5D Mark IV (we recommend always having a backup body for wedding/event photography purposes). Or, if you're a hobbyist who is uninterested in DSLR video recording and does not intend on needing/wanting the majority of the 5D IV's benefits, then the EOS 6D will ultimately be the better choice.

For everyone else, there's the 5D Mark IV.

If upgrading from a Rebel/***D series camera, or even an earlier **D model (like the EOS 60D), the Canon EOS 80D and EOS 5D Mark IV can each provide unique benefits that make them sensible upgrade candidates. So let's break down the differences to see which body provides the right upgrade path for you.

Let's first look at the EOS 80D as it will likely provide an easy, seamless transition for those who are already using a crop-sensor camera such as a Rebel/****D/***D/**D. By "seamless transition," I mean that all of your current lenses should be compatible with the 80D. I say "should" because there's a very small chance that some older third-party lenses may not be fully compatible with bodies released after their manufacture.

And make no mistake, compatibility with EF-S lenses can be a significant benefit. Lenses designed specifically for crop sensor cameras are generally smaller, lighter and less expenisve than their designed-for-full-frame counterparts. Of course, EF-S lenses do have their drawbacks, such as often a lower build quality and a lack of weather sealing.

Now let's look at the 80D's benefits over the 5D Mark IV:

• Built-in Master Flash: Yes vs. N/A
• Higher Continuous Shooting Buffer (RAW): 25 RAW vs. 21
• LCD: Vari-angle Touch Screen vs. Fixed
• More Custom Functions: 26 vs. 17
• Higher Battery Life: Approx. 960 shots vs. 900
• Smaller Size: 5.47 x 4.14 x 3.09" (139.0 x 105.2 x 78.5mm) vs. 5.93 x 4.58 x 2.99" (150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm)
• Lighter Weight: 25.75 oz (730g) vs. 31.4 oz (890g)
• Compatible Mounts: EF, EF-S, TS-E & MP-E Lenses vs. EF, TS-E & MP-E
• Significantly Lower Price

Of the benefits listed above, the most compelling for most consumers is the significantly lower price. In fact, you could nearly purchase (3) EOS 80Ds for the price of a single 5D Mark IV at MSRP (without rebates).

That kind of price differential brings the 5D Mark IV's numerous benefits into perspective. And while we're on the subject, let's take a look at the 5D Mark IV's benefits over the 80D:

• Higher Resolution: 30.4 MP vs. 24.2
• Image Processor: DIGIC 6+ vs. DIGIC 6
• Better High ISO Results (example: comparison @ ISO 6400)
• More AF Points: 61 Point / 41 cross-type AF points inc. 5 dual cross type at f/2.8 and 61 points / 21 cross-type AF points at f/8 vs. 45 cross-type AF points inc. center dual cross type at f/2.8 and 27 points / 9 cross-type at f/8
• Metering Sensor: Approx. 150,000-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, 252-zone metering vs. 7560-pixel RGB+IR metering sensor, metering with the area divided into 63 segments (9×7)
• Lower Light Metering Range: EV 0 – 20 vs. EV 1 – 20
• Larger ISO Range: 100-32000, L:50, H1: 51200, H2: 102400 vs. 100-16000, H: 25600
• More Durable Shutter: 150,000 shots vs. 100,000
• Higher Continuous Buffer (JPEG): Unlimited JPEGS vs. 110
• Higher Max. Video Resolution: 4K (17:9) 4096 x 2160 vs. Full HD (16:9) 1920 x 1080
• GPS: Built-in vs. optional accessory
• Mult-controller (Joystick): Yes vs. N/A
• Faster USB: Super-speed 3.0 vs. High-speed 2.0
• Memory Cards: CompactFlash Type I (UDMA 7 compatible) & SD/SDHC/SDXC (UHS-I) cards vs. SD, SDHC or SDXC (UHS-I)
• Body Materials: Magnesium Alloy vs. Polycarbonate resin with glass fiber

One benefit I did not list for the 80D is the FOVCF (Field of View Crop Factor). Because the 80D's sensor is smaller than the full frame sensor found in the 5D Mark IV, it captures a narrower angle of view at the same focal length compared to the 5D Mark IV. A good description of the effect can be found in our Field of View Crop Factor page:

Although the physical focal length of a lens is not actually changed on a FOVCF camera, the subject framing certainly is. By multiplying the lens focal length (or focal length range) by the FOVCF, you get the full-frame focal length lens subject framing equivalent when used at the same distance. For example, if you are looking for similar framing that a 50mm lens (the classic "normal" lens) provides on a full-frame (1.0x crop factor) SLR body, you probably want a 35mm lens on your 1.6x FOVCF body. 35mm x 1.6 = similar framing to a 56mm lens on a full-frame camera body. This focal length is often referred to as the "Effective Focal Length". The lens is still a 35mm lens, but your final image will only include a crop of the lens' complete image.

Where the 80D's FOVCF becomes especially problematic is wide angle photography. Because crop sensor cameras provide a narrower angle of view at the same focal length compared to full frame cameras, wide angle views are sacraficed when using full frame compatible lenses on the 80D.

A big advantage of the larger full frame sensor camera is the ability to create a stronger background blur. Because a longer focal length is required for the 5D IV to create the same subject framing as the APS-C format 80D, the background can be more diffusely blurred in comparison.

So which DSLR should you get between the two bodies compared above? As usual, one's personal preferences, specific needs and budget will provide the answer. That the 5D Mark IV is the more capable, better spec'd body is an easy conclusion. However, the price difference between the 80D and 5D Mark IV is substantial, and one must be able to justify the 5D IV's superset of features to justify the higher investment.

Those who may be easily able to justify the 5D IV's higher investment include photographers who primarily appreciate the camera's better image quality including cleaner high ISO results and higher resolution, increased shutter durability, dual memory card slots, wider angles of view and 4K recording capability. And for those photographers who don't feel that the 5D IV's benefits are worth the incremental price difference over the 80D can enjoy the wealth of features afforded by the crop sensor camera at roughly 1/3 the cost.