# So, we demo'd 6Ds over the last week, and ugh, what was Canon thinking



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

So, as a lot of our 7Ds and 5DIIs are reaching the end of their life cycle, we've been trying to get a handle on what to move into for our next wave of upgrades at work.  In a lot of ways the 6D looked near perfect, as it would allow us to go almost entirely full frame, the auto focus system seemed promising compared to the 5DII.  We were hopeful that we could upgrade the bulk of our failing 7Ds and 5DIIs to 6Ds and then just have a few 7Ds purely for sports and a few top end 5DIIIs for our higher end work.  

Basically, to me this is perhaps a bigger flop of a camera than the 60D was in comparison the the D7000.

First, pure image quality is fine.  But pure image quality on a 5D classic is fine too.  You don't upgrade modern full frame cameras for image quality.  But I just wanted to get that out of the way.  It's nice, but so is jsut about every full frame made by Canon or Nikon.

First, the autofocus system is not particularly good.  It's slightly better than the 5DII, but nowhere near the 5DIII.  It will 'focus' in low light, like Canon says, in that it will tell you it has focused, but the images are almost always fairly out of focus in real world usage.  

Next, it claims 4.5 fps.  That's already on the low end for sports.  But this is made worse by the fact that it actually rarely seemed to achieve that.  It seemed to routinely be at more like 3.5-4 fps in actual usage 

No built in flash?  is this a pro camera or a consumer camera?  Decide?  THis didn't so much bother me as it just seems weird, as we only use pocket wizards and OCF at work, but still, it's just strange.

Build quality wise, it feels cheap.  It's about the size of a 7D, more or less, but weighs substantially less.  Balance on a 70-200 f/2.8 IS II L was off.  It almost felt like you were holding a hollow shell.  

X sync speed of 1/180?  Are you freaking kidding me?  Like I didn't even know cameras with that kind of sync speed were even made any longer.  

You got rid of the joystick in it's near optimal position for an inside the wheel control?  Seriously?  Like the joystick focal point control was the ONE THING that made the 5DIIs autofocus system workable.  This camera's system ain't much butter.  Now, the button to move it is inside the aperture control ring, which makes the aperture control ring even more useless, and basically forced into lock at all times if you're changing focal points.  When your ergonomic design means that a photographer has to choose between controlling the focal point and controlling aperture, you've screwed things up.  

We knew that they had moved to SD cards, but as a Canon studio that has a crap ton of CF cards, this camera needed to own to overcome that disadvantage.  Obviously this might not matter to many who are buying this from a 60D.  But it does bring up a point I'll come back to.  Who is going to buy this thing?  Nobody is going to switch from a 5DII to it.  Nobody is going to switch from Nikon for it.  Heck, I doubt anybody will give up their 7D for it.  It's basically an upgrade just aimed at 60D users?  Seriously?

Did I complain about the auto focus already?  Yeah, it sucks.  The low light claim seems to be bogus.  Even though it has 11 points, their spread is even smaller than the 5DIIs barely adequate 9 point system.  

Adding in the Q button was nice, as that was something I always missed when going back and forth between the 7D and 5DII.  Literally I'd pick up the 5DII and say 'where the crap is the Q button, oh yeah.'  However, much of that is mitigated by the less convenient location of the joy stick. 

why go to SD cards when you're only going to give a single slot?  People love dual slots.  Why just 1?  It's not a deal breaker, but why?  It made sense with CF cards, but now it just seems lazy.

One tiny thing I love is that you can now feel the difference between the ISO control button and the rest.  Simple thing, but I really liked that a lot.  

SO those were specific notes I made.  Overall, it's just a, I don't get it type of feeling.  Who are they targeting with this camera?  It's $2700 with the kit lens.  APS-C owners are going to have to update their lenses if they're trying to get them to move up.  Plus, despite being long in the tooth, the 7D is in a lot of ways a better camera.  It's too expensive to entice many t4i owners.  maybe 60D owners, they're literally the only people I can see consistently moving into this camera.  

Further, I cannot envision a single person who is going back and forth between this camera and the D600, which is **$700** cheaper with the kit lens.  The D600 DESTROYS the 6D in auto focus, both in points and accuracy and speed.  the D600's high ISO performance is better and shoots faster.  It's just a plain better camera in basically every respect.  Well, Canon's ISO button placement is better, but that is literally the ONLY positive I can find for the 6D.  The 6Dt has ONE (1) cross type sensor.  And no, despite whatever Canon's claims are, the other points didn't become magical.  They're completely average non cross type points.  And there are only 10 of them (excluding the 1 cross type in the center) and they're clustered even tighter than the D600 (which was already pretty tight for a full frame).  

So, Canon is really expecting people to buy this camera?  Like built in wi-fi and GPS is going to be something that sells it despite it costing $700 more than the D600, and being easily bested in just about every single way?

We wanted to buy this camera.  We wanted to buy like 15-20 of them.  Instead it looks like we'll be buying a couple more 5DIIs, 5DIIIs and 7Ds.  This thing is a bit of a joke, given the price point and what it lacks.  It's not a terrible camera, it's a terrible camera for the price point, given the competition.


----------



## molested_cow (Dec 17, 2012)

Why not just get Nikon if Canon disappoints? Opps, wrong place to make this suggestion!


----------



## Overread (Dec 17, 2012)

Eh Canon has a problem in that their marketing department is very overly aggressive in protecting higher value cameras by generally crippling anything lower than them. The 6D sounds like its being a big of a modern 300D in that they just crippled it way too far for the market slot they tried to make for it; especially as Nikon appears to have decided on a whole generation ahead of Canon for specifications in this market slot. 

The only saving grace for  Canon is that jumping to Nikon would likely cost as much if not more, than the difference between a 6D and the 5DMIII - so anyone in such a position would likely just throw down the extra money for the 5DMIII.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

Overread said:


> Eh Canon has a problem in that their marketing department is very overly aggressive in protecting higher value cameras by generally crippling anything lower than them. The 6D sounds like its being a big of a modern 300D in that they just crippled it way too far for the market slot they tried to make for it; especially as Nikon appears to have decided on a whole generation ahead of Canon for specifications in this market slot.
> 
> The only saving grace for  Canon is that jumping to Nikon would likely cost as much if not more, than the difference between a 6D and the 5DMIII - so anyone in such a position would likely just throw down the extra money for the 5DMIII.



I sort of get that, but who is going to move to a 6D?  That's what I don't get.  I don't think 5DII owners will.  maybe some 5D Classic owners.  APS-C owners will be fairly neutral, unless they bought full frame capable glass from day 1.  For many it might be cheaper to simply sell off their canon gear and change to a D600 if they don't own much full frame capable glass.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

molested_cow said:


> Why not just get Nikon if Canon disappoints? Opps, wrong place to make this suggestion!



Well, our studio has about a quarter million dollars in full frame canon glass.  So I don't think we will be switching.  But if it was just me, an individual owner, and I couldn't afford a 5DIII, yeah, I'd switch.  

The 5DIII is an incredible camera though.  I can't say enough about it.  So this isn't just Canon hate.  I just do not understand the 6D.


----------



## Overread (Dec 17, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > Eh Canon has a problem in that their marketing department is very overly aggressive in protecting higher value cameras by generally crippling anything lower than them. The 6D sounds like its being a big of a modern 300D in that they just crippled it way too far for the market slot they tried to make for it; especially as Nikon appears to have decided on a whole generation ahead of Canon for specifications in this market slot.
> ...



6D is clearly not aimed at the 5DMII market - that is what the 5DMIII is aimed at. Yes its a higher price, but upgrading always costs more sadly and if they want better then the MIII is where they have to go. 

I can see crop sensor users moving up to the 6D if they want a cheaper "new" fullframe DSLR and not a second hand 5D or 5DMII. The thing about glass is also not as big an issue. If they are serious enough for a 6D chances are they'll have a few more serious lenses and there are only around 9 or so crop sensor only Canon lenses (a few more if you include 3rd party options). So it shouldn't be all that crippling (asides if they went for a 5D they'd still have the same problems). 

I can see the market for the 6D, I just feel that Canon missed the boat with the features to make the 6D attractive enough in its own right as opposed to making it a lesser camera; as opposed to Nikon who are clearly determined to get this market segment.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

Yeah, it seemed like they meant to make this such that not only was it clearly inferior to the 5DIII, which is understandable, but they seemed heck bent on making it inferior to the 5DII as well, which makes no sense to me.  It seems like it should have been positioned such that all the 5DII owners who can't stomach the cost of the 5DIII could still give Canon their money for the 6D.  Instead, what I think will happen is you'll have a lot of 5DII owners who simply don't upgrade to either and stick with their 5DII.  I mean our studio is going to buy new 5DIIs because it makes no sense for us to have that many 5DIIIs and we sure as heck aren't buying 6Ds.  

With the D600, Nikon made it at least tempting for D700 owners who couldn't afford the D800's price tag (or didn't want the ginormous file size).  They gave an option for owners of aging D700s who weren't going to buy a D800.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 17, 2012)

I used a D600 on a small gig last week in a super dark space. I usually use D4's in the situation I was in, but I wasn't getting paid and I didn't want to carry anything. The sensor kicks major ass, but the AF in the dark outside of the center 9 points pretty much just doesn't work without the AF-assist on a speedlight. The grip is also too chintzy, it was just really uncomfortable all the time. 

I've toyed around with a 6D, ergonomically it's 100x better than a D600, and it pairs up with the Sigma primes really really well. I'll be trying that one out next time I do a freebie thing.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

Sw1tchFX said:


> I used a D600 on a small gig last week in a super dark space. I usually use D4's in the situation I was in, but I wasn't getting paid and I didn't want to carry anything. The sensor kicks major ass, but the AF in the dark outside of the center 9 points pretty much just doesn't work without the AF-assist on a speedlight. The grip is also too chintzy, it was just really uncomfortable all the time.
> 
> I've toyed around with a 6D, ergonomically it's 100x better than a D600, and it pairs up with the Sigma primes really really well. I'll be trying that one out next time I do a freebie thing.



Having used them both, basically the 6D's auto focus system is like if you were to take the outside points that are on the D600, and made every point like that, except the one central point. I will say that one central point is extremely accurate.  If I had to use the 6D, I honestly don't think I'd ever use anything other than the one central point unless I was in really bright light.  

I didn't mind the feel of the D600 in comparison to the 6D.  But perhaps I'm also just used to the feel of the D7000 with a grip.  

I don't so much mind the way the camera feels in the hand, though it is way inferior feeling to the 7D.  However, I just really, really, really hate that the joystick is inside the aperture ring, given how much you have to use the focus control pad, because of having very few points that are also tightly clustered.


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 17, 2012)

omg like worst camera ever.

Canon's marketing is actually working just as I assume they wanted it to.

"WOAH, the 6D makes me want to vomit and then drown myself in bleach. Looks like I'm just going to have to save up for the 5DIII."
Or
"Finally, a simple full frame camera with good image quality without being overloaded with features."

I honestly don't understand what the problem is. I'll probably get one, because I freaking HATE the ergonomics of the 5D and the 5dII (although the Mark III is a bit better), and because the sensor is supposedly a bit better in terms of ISO and such. That's the thing. If the sensor was worse than the 5DIII then I'd be like "meh", but since it is apparently better, I can live with the awful, dreadfully awful performance in other areas, because hyperbole is easy and cheap on the internet.

Coming from the 60D, it should be a great step up, and when it comes to needing faster AF I'm just going to sell my 1DII and buy a Mark III.

Everybody is ALWAYS complaining. There are several people that I talk to are complaining about the D800 because it has too many megapixels. My god first world problems. Seriously.

I would like the features of the D600 to be included in the 6D, but they're not, so I'm not going to ***** about it.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> omg like worst camera ever.
> 
> It's amazing how anyone ever survived in the history of ever without a D4 or 5DIII.
> 
> ...



If you hate the ergonomics on the 5DII, I don't see what you'd like better about this camera.  The only real major differences are the Q button (which I love) and the repositioning of the joystick. The camera itself is very slightly smaller, and a good bit lighter, but other than that the ergonomics are near identical.  The buttons from the left side have been repositioned, but they weren't buttons you'd use while shooting anyway.


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 17, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > omg like worst camera ever.
> ...



I've held both, and it's smaller (like the 60D) and has the layout (like the 60D). The handling and feel are not nearly identical to me. It's more like a fancy 5DII vs. a fancy 60D. :/

But regardless, the sheer image quality of the 6D is pleasantly surprising and makes me happy that at least Canon didn't skimp on the meat of the camera.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > rexbobcat said:
> ...



I honestly can't tell the difference between its image quality and a 5DII.  I guess maybe it measures better, but not in a real world applicable way, or at least that's what I found.  

Like I said in the original post, i guess 60D owners would be happy with this upgrade.  The other issue is that they're just getting ripped off comparatively.  I CANNOT understand why this camera is $700 more than the D600, and $400 more than the 5DII.  

I guess I just really wanted to love this camera and for us to change over to it before the studio really picks back up.  maybe I'm being a bit unfair to it.


----------



## sekhar (Dec 17, 2012)

6D actually beats 5D3 is some key areas. High ISO performance is unbelievable, quite a bit better than 5D3's - check out pretty much any comparison floating around. I've had a 6D for like 10 days, and I cannot believe the ISO numbers I can shoot at. Even 12,800 is usable. You didn't like focusing, but I've found it to be really fast and accurate, even in low light. I've read reports that 6D beats 5D3 in low light (speed wise). Even GPS can be really useful for travel/landscape IMO, and I've found that WiFi can be great if you use the phone for remote shooting. Video is pretty bad though (much worse in aliasing/moire compared to 5D3) - hopefully Canon will release a firmware fix.


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 17, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > fjrabon said:
> ...



$2099 is $600 more than the D600? O_O

I'm just going by stuff I've seen both online and while handling the camera at a local camera store.

Canon 6d v.s. 5d mark III lowlight testing

Canon 6D and 5DMk3 Noise Comparison for High-ISO Long Exposures

I've played with the camera and from looking at those samples and from seeing the 5DII files I have to think that you must have a very good 5DII if the 6D y'all are using is closer to it and than the 5DIII. And even DXO Mark rated it higher and as everyone knows they are the end-all-be-all so it MUST be true. lol

Are you sure you're not trying hard to not like anything about the camera? I'm only being half serious. When I am very disappointed in something I tend to want to despise even it's best qualities.

But in the end, there's nothing I can do about being comparatively ripped off, so I'm going to go with the flow instead of stressing over something I can't change. It's either a 5DIII or it's a 6D and light modifiers, or a new lens investment, or a 1D Mark III. To someone who doesn't have a lot of money, $700 more for a 5D Mark III is a lot of money.

Just like people are complaining about the D600 because it just wasn't as good as they wanted, but are also complaining about the D800 because it is too much camera. I was flabbergasted when I went to a Nikon forum and saw that they were ragging on the D600. I think that it's not the camera makers' faults as much as the market is just super spoiled.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2012)

rexbobcat said:
			
		

> $2099 is $600 more than the D600? O_O



Ummm, I think what he meant is that right now, the Nikon D600 can be had with the 24-85mm AF-S VR Nikkor zoom lens, and a free memory card, and a free shoulder bag or monopod, and free shipping, from a number of vendors, for $1996 to $1999. So, in effect, *Nikon is GIVING AWAY a "free" $599 zoom lens*, and has also discounted the body price by $100...the savings are being listed as $700 for the kit. And that $700 discount does NOT include the value of the free accessories like the shoulder bag, or monopod, or memory card! Oh...and the 6D has no flash either, so that's another few hundred dollars the user needs to spend.

The way it actually shapes up is that Nikon is discounting the D600 in a VERY,very big way. Europe and Japan are in economic recession, and the USA's economy is not doing so hot either. Nikon is trying very hard to boost unit sales, while it seems that Canon is doing basically, money-grabs with the 5D-III's pricing and the 6D's pricing.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> > rexbobcat said:
> ...



I will be honest and say I didn't really test them in extremely low light, but that's simply because I don't ever shoot in very low light for work.  A dark basketball gym is about as dark as we get, and the 5DII never had ISO issues in that sort of scenario.  So perhaps the 6D is a world beater high ISO wise, I honestly wouldn't know, because that's not how we'd ever use it.

I can tell you we all looked over a lot of files, and pure image quality wise, we just simply couldn't tell the difference between the 6D and 5DII at normal sizes.  I appreciate what DxO mark does, but at the same time, after about 80 on their scale it just seems like it's academic for full frames.  To my eyes, all the modern full frames from Nikon and Canon I've used have good enough image quality to be practically indistinguishable for all ordinary use.  The D800 is kinda crazy if you pixel peep, as is the 5DIII, but that's about it.  

As far as 'having a really good 5DII' goes, we have 25 of them, so I don't think we managed to get the luckiest batch of 25 ever, haha.

I honestly was really excited when we got our 6Ds in to demo.  Perhaps that was really the issue, that I was just hoping for too much.  I was honestly expecting that the purported differences between the 6D and the D600 had been exaggerated.


----------



## TexasTea (Dec 17, 2012)

I'm pretty impressed with how hard you're ripping on the 6D.  Sure, it's not a 5DIII but we're talking a different ballpark of camera.  Body alone is a substantial step in price.  I migrated from the 7D over to the 6D recently and haven't once looked back.  Since this is a hobby for me, I can't justify ponying up the extra cash to buy a 5DIII right now.  So the 6D was an awesome change for me.  And the weight argument blows my mind...  5DII to the 6D would be an improvement no question.


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 17, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > fjrabon said:
> ...



Ah. Most comparisons are referring to the ISO performance at either long exposures or ISO over 3200, as in the 6D keeps up with the 5DIII at least up to there and the 5DII keeps up to the 5DIII up to there somewhat (I think?).

And I shoot at ISO 3200/6400 a lot with my 60D so knowing that the 6D trumps the 5DII in at least that aspect makes it a winner in my book. I just can't jump on board the whole "it costs more, it has better features, it must have a better sensor" boat. I understand that the 5DIII should be a top tier contender, but meh, I have a hard time believing that the 6D "is as bad as" the 5DII. I've never really been that impressed with the 5D Mark II though, I think because everyone touted it as this incredible thing but when I finally got around to using it I was kind of not blown away. It was good, just not as good as I expected. The 6D was the opposite, although I was desperately hoping that the 6D had at least as good as sensor as the 5DIII and I think it does from what I can tell. If I was making like $30k a year I would love to have a 5DIII with a 6D as backup, but I'm making at most $5k so I have to really plan out camera gear purchases and budget accordingly.

I guess it depends on what a person needs vs. what they can afford. For the the money I say on the 5DIII I can buy a 1D Mark III and still have a 6D lol.

But yeah, I know that that the general pretentious wisdom is "the camera doesn't make the photographer" or whatever but I've always been a technology junkie so just owning and using the technology gives me some kind of enjoyment regardless of what I'm using the equipment for.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2012)

Cameras are tools, as well as instruments of profit-making and revenue stream to their manufacturers. The actual capabilities that a specific camera model has can, at times, make it a real PITA to work with, or the capabilities can make the camera handle great, shoot great, and allow it to deliver fantastic results. "Some cameras" are what the British call, "well-sorted", meaning that the features and controls and capabilities are well-balanced, thoughtfully arranged, and designed to work well. One of the single-biggest issues I have seen in cameras over the last 35 years is how well **changes** are received by the installed user base. This new placement of the 8-way controller INSIDE OF the rear control wheel??? Whoa....now that is a *dubious *move, in my estimation...

The direction-pad, AKA the "joystick" that Canon stole from Nikon back in the 30D era...well...they ditched that on the 6D. Nikon too, has been "simplifying" the rear-of-camera Autofocus AREA AND AF-MODE controls; the D4 and the D800 now have dumbed-down controls, and are designed to allow the camera to do what the photographer used to do on the D2 series. The D3 series omitted one AF-MODE setting compared  to the D2 series bodies, and now, the D800 and D4 have gone to basically *dummy mode, with even less control*! Canon ditching the joystick button entirely, and making a dual-function control location??? VERY dubious as far as finding acceptance with the prior generation users...buuut...progressively simplifying seems to be the way to appeal to the "upgraders", coming from simpler cameras. Both Nikon and Canon are following a similar conceptual design path.

Anyway...one of the things I like about reviews like that from fjrabon is that he did not pay for a 6D himself...he is just USING it...he doesn't have that infatuated, rose-tinted-glasses love for the 6D, which comes through in owner reviews. Basically...it's an economy body...with a good sensor, and a crippled AF system, and a new control layout that is designed to, I think,appeal more to casual users and "upgraders" coming from APS-C Canons than to experienced Canon buyers who are used to 5D or 1-series models. Like the new-generation Nikon's, the keyword in body design seems to be to make the cameras *more-simplified*...so that newbies will think, "Hey, this camera is for ME!", and buy it!!! The camera makers need to sell cameras!!!


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

TexasTea said:


> I'm pretty impressed how hard OP is ripping on the 6D.  Sure, it's not a 5DIII but we're talking a different ballpark of camera.  Body alone is a substantial step in price.  I migrated from the 7D over to the 6D recently and haven't once looked back.  Since this is a hobby for me, I can't justify ponying up the extra cash to buy a 5DIII right now.  So the 6D was an awesome change for me.  And the weight argument blows my mind...  5DII to the 6D would be an improvement no question.



The weight argument simply depends on what lenses you're putting on it.  A lot of users like a balanced weight.  And when you're putting really heavy glass on the end (like a 70-200 f/2.8), many users prefer a more beefy body.  Sure, it's a preference, but it's a pretty common preference.  It's certainly not like a mind blowing revelation about full frame cameras.  I mean the whole reason a lot of people put a grip on their camera is to give it a more substantial feel and better balance.  

Also, the 6D wasn't purposefully made that light as much as they were forced to use a plastic top plate for the GPS and WiFi, which wouldn't work well with a magnesium top plate.  That's probably the biggest reasons for the lightness of the 6D.  

My point wasn't that the 5DII is better than the 6D, but that it isn't remotely a clear upgrade.  For people who work with them, the 1/180 max sync time, lack of a sync port PLUS no on board flash is just a really weird combination.  It forces you to ONLY use hot shoe based flash control.  I get not having a sync cable port, and I get not having a built in flash, but I DO NOT even remotely understand not having either. 

The build quality is just better on the 5DII.  Perhaps that's a trade off you're willing to make for the lowered weight, but the 6D isn't even referred to as weather sealed, because of its plastic top plate.  


Again, I don't think it's an awful camera, I just think it missed its mark on either price or performance.  In an isolated world where there were no competitors to it, outside of Canon's own line, maybe it's okay.  Even then it just sort of creates a weird spot IMHO.  It's more expensive than the 5DII, but not leaps and bounds better, despite being 5 years newer.  I think as long as you can buy relatively new 5DIIs, I think it will create a lot of very confused Canon buyers.  

I was really hoping we'd get something that was comparable to the D600, especially given it's more expensive.  And to me, this camera just isn't.  Will it be the end of the world?  Nah.  Perhaps it'll force the studio I work for to buy a 1DX or a few more 5DIIIs that they wouldn't have otherwise bought, and then maybe all will be forgiven, haha.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

to say one thing I said, but perhaps got lost, is that the center focal point is really good.  I guess when Canon made all the claims about the vastly improved AF system, they were only referring to the center point.  I can totally see a lot of photographers just shooting loose, using the center point on EVERY SINGLE SHOT and then cropping for composition in post or focus locking with the center point and re-framing (which approach obviously depending on DoF issues).  

I tend to move my focal point around a lot, and having only one usable focal point was a BIG let down for me on the 6D.  Maybe that's coloring some of the rest of my review.  But only because of how hyped up this new AF system on the 6D was.  

Basically the center point is amongst the best any camera has.  The others are amongst the worst that any camera has, near unusable, even in moderate light (like a gym).  But the center point is really good.  and I like how the ISO button has a dimple in it for easy adjustment while your eye is in the viewfinder.  I like that a lot.  

Another thing to consider is that I always disliked the 60D as well (while I loved the 7D).  Maybe that has to do with it, as this is more a grown up 60D than a full frame 7D.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

Derrel said:


> This new placement of the 8-way controller INSIDE OF the rear control wheel??? Whoa....now that is a ​*dubious move, in my estimation...*
> 
> The direction-pad, AKA the "joystick" that Canon stole from Nikon back in the 30D era...well...they ditched that on the 6D. Nikon too, has been "simplifying" the rear-of-camera Autofocus AREA AND AF-MODE controls; the D4 and the D800 now have dumbed-down controls, and are designed to allow the camera to do what the photographer used to do on the D2 series. The D3 series omitted one AF-MODE setting compared  to the D2 series bodies, and now, the D800 and D4 have gone to basically *dummy mode, with even less control*! Canon ditching the joystick button entirely, and making a dual-function control location??? VERY dubious as far as finding acceptance with the prior generation users...buuut...progressively simplifying seems to be the way to appeal to the "upgraders", coming from simpler cameras. Both Nikon and Canon are following a similar conceptual design path.



I'd be okay-ish with the D-Pad being moved to where it was, not happy but okay, if it wasn't inside the danged aperture control ring.  Canon's aperture control ring system was near unusable enough, with the constant worry of bumping it while you're shooting.  Now it's been rendered completely unusable if you move your focus point around at all.  It's impossible to not bump the ring if you're using the D pad.  So now, all changes in aperture require a flick of the lock switch off, moving the ring, then locking it back.  Why did I change to dual command wheels to begin with?  It literally feels like I'm back to shooting with a D3100.  In fact, I think you can make the argument that holding down a function button to adjust aperture is actually easier than having to lock and unlock it every time.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2012)

The 6D seems to be a camera that is NOT especially "well-sorted". Polycarbonate top plate, no weather sealing, no PC outlet to hook up a flash sync cord up to, only a single SD card slot, a fairly slow top flash sync speed of 1/180 second, NO built-in flash commander, and NO pop-up flash...man...it's a really stripped-down body...hard to believe Canon sees it as a competitor for any number of Sony or Nikon models. But then again, if a person wants or needs higher-end features, then a person is free to spend $3,499 to buy a Canon 5D Mark III. I think Canon realizes that this camera has just enough for the price point to make it a good value for a certain segment of the market. Being the sales leader, Canon doesn't feel much pressure to offer *real value*. Nikon, being #2, but desiring to move up to the #1 slot, is now offering a FREE $599 24-85mm VR zoom lens and, arguably, a better-featured camera, for the same basic price of right around $2k.

Canon OTOH, has built-in Wi-Fi. Hipsters love Wi-Fi. Even the word...they love the word "Wi-Fi"!


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

Derrel said:


> The 6D seems to be a camera that is NOT especially "well-sorted". Polycarbonate top plate, no weather sealing, no PC outlet to hook up a flash sync cord up to, only a single SD card slot, a fairly slow top flash sync speed of 1/180 second, NO built-in flash commander, and NO pop-up flash...man...it's a really stripped-down body...hard to believe Canon sees it as a competitor for any number of Sony or Nikon models. But then again, if a person wants or needs higher-end features, then a person is free to spend $3,499 to buy a Canon 5D Mark III. I think Canon realizes that this camera has just enough for the price point to make it a good value for a certain segment of the market. Being the sales leader, Canon doesn't feel much pressure to offer *real value*. Nikon, being #2, but desiring to move up to the #1 slot, is now offering a FREE $599 24-85mm VR zoom lens and, arguably, a better-featured camera, for the same basic price of right around $2k.
> 
> Canon OTOH, has built-in Wi-Fi. Hipsters love Wi-Fi. Even the word...they love the word "Wi-Fi"!



True story, our CEO's eyes lit up when he heard built in Wi-Fi and GPS... Until he found out that it wasn't so that the cameras could be tracked in real time.


----------



## Overread (Dec 17, 2012)

I think its just more that you don't like the entry level midrange bodies that Canon puts out. Canon has been active in introducing the 60D and the 6D as cheaper bodies for the middle of their price range, because they've had to push up the upper price limit for that market in the 7D and 5DMIII. So to cope they split the midrange into two distinct segments, lower and upper. From your position you're not a lower market user, so you have to take the hit of the price rises and go for the 5DMIII if you want to upgrade. 


The points raised about simplification are worrying to me. I find that many companies try to simplify in the same way, by making the item (whatever it is) do far more automatically and then by hiding away all the advanced controls in menus and option lists and even dreaded optional optional lists*. Touchscreen is also another "streamlining" feature that they like to pair with this menu driven setup. The problem is, for the user who has more than a passing experience and who has a desire for more control, the unit becomes increasingly harder and harder to use. 

Heck all those "easy" bridge and point and shoot cameras are a nightmare to use if I want to do anything specific beyond pointing and shooting. 

Honestly I hope Canon and the other brands keep this idea aimed at entry level and let the advanced level bodies keep those buttons. I don't want touchscreens and endless menus slowing me down or getting me lost or being things I have to memorise so I can control the unit without having to chimp the whole time. 


*the ones you have to enable in options before you can see the additional options they have


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

Overread said:


> I think its just more that you don't like the entry level midrange bodies that Canon puts out. Canon has been active in introducing the 60D and the 6D as cheaper bodies for the middle of their price range, because they've had to push up the upper price limit for that market in the 7D and 5DMIII. So to cope they split the midrange into two distinct segments, lower and upper. From your position you're not a lower market user, so you have to take the hit of the price rises and go for the 5DMIII if you want to upgrade.
> 
> 
> The points raised about simplification are worrying to me. I find that many companies try to simplify in the same way, by making the item (whatever it is) do far more automatically and then by hiding away all the advanced controls in menus and option lists and even dreaded optional optional lists*. Touchscreen is also another "streamlining" feature that they like to pair with this menu driven setup. The problem is, for the user who has more than a passing experience and who has a desire for more control, the unit becomes increasingly harder and harder to use.
> ...



Yeah, that makes a lot of sense on both your points.  I was sort of hoping for a workmanlike camera that was full frame with little that I didn't need.  What I got was a camera with lots of crap I don't care about, and all the stuff I really want skimped on.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 17, 2012)

fjrabon said:
			
		

> SNIP> I was sort of hoping for a workmanlike camera that was full frame with little that I didn't need.  What I got was a camera with lots of crap I don't care about, and all the stuff I really want skimped on.



Ummmm, yeah....uh-huh. Basically, the 6D is NOT designed as a camera for the working photographer. It's...just...not designed for that segment of the market. Your dissatisfaction with the D-pad and other missing features just shows how far off the mark the camera is,compared to what you want, and expect, and are used to. Your disappointment with the 6D is a pretty clear indicator that it's not targeted at people like you.

http://www.brooksbrothers.com/on/de...B&gclid=CJqN89Kco7QCFUxxQgodcHYAPQ&&WT.srch=1


http://www.carhartt.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/HomeView?storeId=10051&catalogId=10101&fullsite=


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 17, 2012)

Derrel said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ha, I was thinking more in terms of :

51OC8uKQuNL.jpg

v.

polo-shirts.png

haha


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 17, 2012)

Does this mean that as a photographer who works that I can't do a good job with the 6D because it's not designed for that purpose.

Well son of a b-

Do I also need certification from the PPA before I can become a real full time professional?

Why does nobody tell me these things ahead of time?


----------



## sekhar (Dec 18, 2012)

fjrabon said:


> ...I like how the ISO button has a dimple in it for easy adjustment while your eye is in the viewfinder.  I like that a lot.


There's also a customization that lets you program the set button so you can change ISO by simultaneously pressing set and turning the wheel. That's super convenient because you can see the readings on the LCD while you change the ISO that way (vs. the ISO button on the top + turn wheel that not only needs two steps but also hides the readings).

I know you don't think much of the 6D, but it is features like this ability to customize, stuff like micro-focus on lenses both on wide and tele ends, etc. that have people scratching their heads on who Canon is targeting with the 6D. I doubt you can dismiss it as just an inferior 5D3 targeted at the prosumers/enthusiasts. The lines are blurring anyway.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 18, 2012)

So, the 6D costs $1,400 LESS than the 5D-III, and somehow, it's not an inferior camera, and somehow it's NOT targeted at prosumers and enthusiasts?

Are you saying that Canon's $3,500 body is equal to their $2,099 body? Or that Canon's $3,500 body is targeted at the same people who can only afford, or want, a $2099 body?

And, Canon has finally figured out how to make the equivalent of Nikon's "FUNC" button? You know, the button that Nikon premiered back in the 2005 era??? You know, where there is a button the user can press and hold, and then click the thumb wheel, and with ONE click, change a critical function, that he or she has assigned directly TO THAT BUTTON??? Like ISO shift. Or high-speed crop. Or 8x10 aspect ratio capture.  Or AUTO Bracketing. OR  And so on.


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 18, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> So, the 6D costs $1,400 LESS than the 5D-III, and somehow, it's not an inferior camera, and somehow it's NOT targeted at prosumers and enthusiasts?
> 
> Are you saying that Canon's $3,500 body is equal to their $2,099 body? Or that Canon's $3,500 body is targeted at the same people who can only afford, or want, a $2099 body?
> 
> And, Canon has finally figured out how to make the equivalent of Nikon's "FUNC" button? You know, the button that Nikon premiered back in the 2005 era??? You know, where there is a button the user can press and hold, and then click the thumb wheel, and with ONE click, change a critical function, that he or she has assigned directly TO THAT BUTTON??? Like ISO shift. Or high-speed crop. Or 8x10 aspect ratio capture.  Or AUTO Bracketing. OR  And so on.



I can buy a legitimate 5DIII for $2800 on Ebay, new.

But anyways, as a camera with "professional" features, it is inferior. As an image making device it's not, thankfully.


----------



## sekhar (Dec 18, 2012)

Derrel said:


> So, the 6D costs $1,400 LESS than the 5D-III, and somehow, it's not an inferior camera, and somehow it's NOT targeted at prosumers and enthusiasts?
> 
> Are you saying that Canon's $3,500 body is equal to their $2,099 body? Or that Canon's $3,500 body is targeted at the same people who can only afford, or want, a $2099 body?
> 
> And, Canon has finally figured out how to make the equivalent of Nikon's "FUNC" button? You know, the button that Nikon premiered back in the 2005 era??? You know, where there is a button the user can press and hold, and then click the thumb wheel, and with ONE click, change a critical function, that he or she has assigned directly TO THAT BUTTON??? Like ISO shift. Or high-speed crop. Or 8x10 aspect ratio capture.  Or AUTO Bracketing. OR  And so on.



No, I'm saying 6D actually beats 5D3 in material ways like high ISO performance, and that's surprising. Wouldn't you agree that getting a clean image with quick focus in real low light would be important to at least some pros? Given the low weight, excellent high ISO behavior, GPS, etc. I'd say Canon is targeting this also at pro travel and landscape photographers. And I wasn't talking Canon vs. Nikon at all. 6D has many more customizations too BTW, not just what I mentioned.

Also, to the OP: you might want to check out this 6D vs. 5D2 comparison video as you make your decision on whether or not to move to 6D.


----------



## ceejtank (Dec 18, 2012)

Thanks for the user review of the camera.  Looks like I'll be going MIII.


----------



## Refill (Dec 18, 2012)

Hello all, this is my first post, just to give my newbies advice!

When Canon first announced the 6d, it was exactly what I needed to complement my 7d. A smaller FF body, for landscape, travel, street.

But now I'm a bit disappointed, and I don't think I will buy it. 

Looking at image quality comparisons, it seems fine, although I don't see much difference with 5d III. Better than 60d and 7d no question, but not at the same level as  the d600-d800, to me! So for the price of the 7d and 6d I'd have better performances with the 5dIII?

I'd really like to see a more robust and weather proof body (K5)! and some details add to the cons list: no joystick, only sd cards, no flash, price, etc.

There is a mention of a "light" version, without wifi or GPS, in the manual, any news about that?


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 18, 2012)

sekhar said:
			
		

> Also, to the OP: you might want to check out this 6D vs. 5D2 comparison video as you make your decision on whether or not to move to 6D.



Thanks, but I've used both the 6D and 5DII. I don't really need to watch a video.


----------



## STIC (Dec 18, 2012)

...


----------



## CanonJim (Dec 18, 2012)

I was mildly excited when I first read about the 6D but after seeing reviews and usage reports here and there, I more or less fell back to my original "next camera upgrade", the 5D/II.  For the Way I Shoot, and for the foreseeable future, I don't need a high frame rate or astronomical ISO setting - 95% of my shots are on tripod, in daylight.  I rarely use flash, and have no need for video. All I want is a decent full frame body. I don't pixel peep, nor print billboards. I have only 1 EF-S lens, and I can probably get very nearly$600 for it when the time comes, making a new 5D/II body come in a scootch under 1 grand. ($1529 on Amazon  at the moment)  I can't see spending the $2100 (ok, $1600..) for the 6D when it has no real obvious advantage for me. It seems the 6D is an upgrade only from the 5D Mark 1...So as long as Canon continues to make the 5D/II, I don't see what the 6D gets you. NOW, if they stopped making the 5D/II, that's a different story....


----------



## STIC (Dec 18, 2012)

...


----------



## Derrel (Dec 18, 2012)

Seems like instead of having hit a home run, Canon hit a bloop single with the 6D...


----------



## STIC (Dec 18, 2012)

...


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 18, 2012)

I still don't understand what's so wrong with the camera that it's a giant flop....

From what I can tell it's a perfectly capable camera even though it doesn't take the picture for you.

And for every feature that's missing, there's a new and improved version of it in the 5DIII. Oh, it's too expensive....Well, I don't really know what to tell you. Sorry?

Maybe it's just because I've been content with inferior equipment for years...


----------



## Derrel (Dec 19, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> I still don't understand what's so wrong with the camera that it's a giant flop....
> 
> Maybe it's just because I've been content with inferior equipment for years...



Satisfaction with a specific product is based partly on prior products, and the features those products had, or lacked. MANY APS-C cameras are very feature-rich, since the sensor costs are so,so low. On full-frame d-slrs, the sensor is a substantially larger part of the total manufacturing cost, and let's face it--the $2,000 price point is $1,400 lower than Canon's previously lowest-cost FF bodies have premiered at. "Something's gotta give." To a user like fjrabon who is used to the Canon 7D, the simplified feature set of the 6D is actually...kind of a step down...

The simplified AF system with just one single cross-type AF sensor, no built-in flash, no built-in flash commander, and low sync speed...all of those things place the 6D body in the "simplified" class. The sensor performance seems good, but there have been features removed...the 60D and 7D both have much,much greater capabilities, spec- and feature-wise. My biggest concern was fjrabon's tale of *dismal autofocusing performance*!!!


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 19, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> Satisfaction with a specific product is based partly on prior products, and the features those products had, or lacked. MANY APS-C cameras are very feature-rich, since the sensor costs are so,so low. On full-frame d-slrs, the sensor is a substantially larger part of the total manufacturing cost, and let's face it--the $2,000 price point is $1,400 lower than Canon's previously lowest-cost FF bodies have premiered at. "Something's gotta give." To a user like fjrabon who is used to the Canon 7D, the simplified feature set of the 6D is actually...kind of a step down...
> 
> The simplified AF system with just one single cross-type AF sensor, no built-in flash, no built-in flash commander, and low sync speed...all of those things place the 6D body in the "simplified" class. The sensor performance seems good, but there have been features removed...the 60D and 7D both have much,much greater capabilities, spec- and feature-wise.



I'm not sure I agree with you about the 60D but with the 7D disregarding the sensor yes there are more features. In my eyes, the 60D is like the lazy  cousin to the 7D. It works decently most of the time but then put it I a difficult situation and it kind of just gives up. Lol


----------



## STIC (Dec 19, 2012)

....


----------



## KenC (Dec 19, 2012)

I don't understand the 6D either.  Before it appeared I assumed it was directed at Rebel owners like me who wanted to upgrade to full-frame for better quality.  However, I can't justify spending what they are asking for it.  I don't know what I expected in terms of price, but I guess if it had come in at not much over $1K I might have been tempted, but for a one or maybe two stop improvement in noise over my T2i it's just not worth it.  I don't even care about the defects that have been pointed out re autofocus, fps, low sync speed, only one card, etc., and the smaller lighter body than the 5D series actually is a plus to me, but just not worth the money, imo.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 19, 2012)

KenC said:
			
		

> I don't understand the 6D either.  Before it appeared I assumed it was directed at Rebel owners like me who wanted to upgrade to full-frame for better quality.  However, I can't justify spending what they are asking for it.  I don't know what I expected in terms of price, but I guess if it had come in at not much over $1K I might have been tempted, but for a one or maybe two stop improvement in noise over my T2i it's just not worth it.  I don't even care about the defects that have been pointed out re autofocus, fps, low sync speed, only one card, etc., and the smaller lighter body than the 5D series actually is a plus to me, but just not worth the money, imo.



Yeah, that was sort of my issue, it's still too expensive for most APS-C owners to really want it. It might snare some 60D owners who have been considering a jump to full frame for a while anyway. But it's not going to convince anybody that was on the fence to come on over.


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 19, 2012)

STIC said:
			
		

> See, now i wouldn't even have bothered looking at a 60D when upgrading from the 40D, as soon as i heard about the specs of the 7D, that was the camera for me (because i can't justify spending 3 times as much on a 5DIII).




Yes but I bought the 60D when the camera And the kit lens were $1099, and the 7D body alone was about $1400-1700.

I also only had my 1D ad no wide angle.

I know I sound super cheap but I'm willing to give up ALOT if it means saving money. I'm just a po' boy.


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 19, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> Satisfaction with a specific product is based partly on prior products, and the features those products had, or lacked. MANY APS-C cameras are very feature-rich, since the sensor costs are so,so low. On full-frame d-slrs, the sensor is a substantially larger part of the total manufacturing cost, and let's face it--the $2,000 price point is $1,400 lower than Canon's previously lowest-cost FF bodies have premiered at. "Something's gotta give." To a user like fjrabon who is used to the Canon 7D, the simplified feature set of the 6D is actually...kind of a step down...
> 
> The simplified AF system with just one single cross-type AF sensor, no built-in flash, no built-in flash commander, and low sync speed...all of those things place the 6D body in the "simplified" class. The sensor performance seems good, but there have been features removed...the 60D and 7D both have much,much greater capabilities, spec- and feature-wise. My biggest concern was fjrabon's tale of dismal autofocusing performance!!!



The more I've thought about this, canon must be intending for users to only use the central point in any remotely low light. I've never seen any camera with such a gulf between quality of the central point to lack of quality of the other points. 

To Rex, if all you're after is a great sensor with great ISO performance, then sure, this is a fine camera. That was the first thing I said in my review. Nobody debates that. What it comes down to is how important everything else is to you. For you, those concerns don't seem to be important, for me they're probably more important than high ISO performance.  Especially for my location work, which is what we were considering this camera for.


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 19, 2012)

fjrabon said:
			
		

> The more I've thought about this, canon must be intending for users to only use the central point in any remotely low light. I've never seen any camera with such a gulf between quality of the central point to lack of quality of the other points.
> 
> To Rex, if all you're after is a great sensor with great ISO performance, then sure, this is a fine camera. That was the first thing I said in my review. Nobody debates that. What it comes down to is how important everything else is to you. For you, those concerns don't seem to be important, for me they're probably more important than high ISO performance.  Especially for my location work, which is what we were considering this camera for.



I was just trying to make the case that the6D isn't necessarily a bad camera. It's just not for some people who need more.

Derrel's first sentence is fairly true. If I was used to driving a Ferrari and I try out a Toyota Prius I'm probably going to think it's crap even though it seems adequate enough for a lot of people lol.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 19, 2012)

It will probably work better in the hands of a real pro


----------



## fjrabon (Dec 19, 2012)

gsgary said:
			
		

> It will probably work better in the hands of a real pro



Yeah, I'm sure that a real pro can increase x sync speed magically. And cause either a built in flash or a sync port to grow out of the camera. Again, the issue wasn't image quality. It takes gorgeous pictures. But so does a 5D classic.


----------



## bratkinson (Dec 20, 2012)

Part of Canons' strategy for the 6D is what's known as 'price point marketing'. Many buyers have certain dollar amounts in mind to spend when buying a car, a refridgerator, computer, and yes, even a camera. The 'trick' to any successful company is having something for each of the major price point that buyers may have in mind. 

Hence, the 6D. Considering that the 5D mark ii is likely no longer produced, what model exists for someone between the $1400 7D and $3400 5D3? Throw in the 'so much better' full frame size sensor and the 6D is a perfect fit for someone with $2500 or so to spend on a body as well as being the 'entry level' full frame camera. 

Hey, compared to a 5D3, the 6D is a Chevette (remember those?). But just as the Chevette got one around town, so, too, will a 6D take good pictures.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 20, 2012)

bratkinson said:
			
		

> Hey, compared to a 5D3, the 6D is a Chevette (remember those?). But just as the Chevette got one around town, so, too, will a 6D take good pictures.



You comment likening the Canon 6D to the Chevrolet Chevette is what is called "damning with faint praise.

"As the North American International Auto Show kicks off in Detroit, TIME and Dan Neil, Pulitzer Prize-winning automotive critic and syndicated columnist for the _Los Angeles Times_, look at the greatest lemons of the automotive industry."


1976 Chevy Chevette - The 50 Worst Cars of All Time - TIME

The 50 Worst Cars of All Time
*1975-1989**1976 Chevy Chevette*


----------



## bratkinson (Dec 20, 2012)

Okay...Cadillac Cimmaron.  It was a Cadillac as well!  Just like the 6D is a Canon!


----------



## Derrel (Dec 20, 2012)

Ohhhhh...another marketing failure...that was the Caddy that Caddy owners refused to buy!!!! In droves!!!


----------



## STIC (Dec 20, 2012)

...


----------



## bratkinson (Dec 21, 2012)

STIC said:


> _More like, the 5D3 is a modern corvette with a big block, the 7D is a modern corvette with a small block and the 6D is a (RHD) corvair with a big block shoehorned in, but the steering and suspension are crap..._



Actually, Chrysler Corporation effectively did that with their Laser/Charger of 1984-88. I think it was '86 they came out with the GLH...a super light/cheap body Dodge Horizon with the same turbo-charged, fuel injected, 5 speed 4 banger engine and tranny as the Laser/Charger. I had a Laser. The only drag I ever lost with it was a GLH...400 pounds less car! Rumor was that when Lee Ioccoca test drove the first one, he said it 'Goes Like Hell!'...hence the name...GLH.

PS...my biggest 'victory' was blowing by a 351 Mustang about 50 yards out of a stoplight.  He thought he had me...then the turbo kicked in!


----------



## TheFantasticG (Dec 21, 2012)

fjrabon said:
			
		

> Yeah, that was sort of my issue, it's still too expensive for most APS-C owners to really want it. It might snare some 60D owners who have been considering a jump to full frame for a while anyway. But it's not going to convince anybody that was on the fence to come on over.



As a 60D and D7000 owner I would go D600 a thousand times over before I go with a 6D. When I heard it had mostly the same AF system as the 60D they totally lost me as a future customer for the 6D. The AF system the 60D made me appreciate my D7000's AF system much more than I did when I went from the D90 to the D7000. I hear the 5Dmk2 AF ain't far off from the 60D AF either... In which case I'd buy a D700.


----------



## AgentDrex (Dec 21, 2012)

Would this be a good upgrade for me, a Canon 1000D user?  It's still the same lens mount, right?  I use manual lenses so AF points are moot and I shoot landscapes so FPS being low isn't a concern for me.


----------



## CCericola (Dec 21, 2012)

The 6D only accepts EF lenses. It might handle older canon mount lenses with an adapter but not the EFS lenses made for crop sensor cameras. I'm not sure if they make an EFS to EF adapter.


----------



## AgentDrex (Dec 21, 2012)

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be using my kit lens and is doesn't get used as is.  I see that from what you wrote that it is an EF mount still, so I'd be good on my adapters.


----------



## STIC (Dec 21, 2012)

...


----------



## rexbobcat (Dec 21, 2012)

STIC said:
			
		

> Well, let me re-phrase that...
> 
> If i owned a crop sensor camera (like a 7D) that allowed me to control settings and functions with an easy to use button system that was very similar to most other offerings, was very fast and capable, then picked up a 6D where i find the controls are all missing and things like iso are hidden in a screen menu, i'd think it was crap...even though it's adequate enough for holiday snaps...
> 
> ...



I've tried both. The 7D has a lot of autofocus points but its accuracy is the equivalent of a deaf bat. Plus the ISO kind of sucks balls.

The 5D has bad ergonomics for my taste and its autofocus and ISO quality is less than that of the 6D. 

Both cameras from my experience are...okay...but my 1D  beats the 7D and the 6D beats the 5DII in my opinion.

If I was looking for a bargain I would not be in photography.

I'm interested in pure image quality. I can always change the technique in which I achieve an image, but it's impossible to improve the inherent image quality that the camera produces.


----------



## TheFantasticG (Dec 22, 2012)

rexbobcat said:


> I can always change the technique in which I achieve an image, but it's impossible to improve the inherent image quality that the camera produces.



Very very very true. That's why I upgraded from the D90 to the D7000. No technique would improve the ISO or the DR of the D90.... Luckily I didn't lose any controls when I went from one to the other


----------



## STIC (Dec 22, 2012)

...


----------



## bigal1000 (Jan 31, 2013)

fjrabon said:


> So, as a lot of our 7Ds and 5DIIs are reaching the end of their life cycle, we've been trying to get a handle on what to move into for our next wave of upgrades at work.  In a lot of ways the 6D looked near perfect, as it would allow us to go almost entirely full frame, the auto focus system seemed promising compared to the 5DII.  We were hopeful that we could upgrade the bulk of our failing 7Ds and 5DIIs to 6Ds and then just have a few 7Ds purely for sports and a few top end 5DIIIs for our higher end work.
> 
> Basically, to me this is perhaps a bigger flop of a camera than the 60D was in comparison the the D7000.
> 
> ...



Why not go buy a Nikon !!


----------

