# Canon 6D + 24-105mm Lens Kit -- Will I regret it? What considerations?



## PaulWog

Hi,

*Shortened version:*
Is the Canon 6D + 24-105mm lens kit going to be something that someone can grow with and enjoy, and not feel the need to upgrade from (if I'm just an amateur)? My only worry is the autofocus points which have been criticized. I'm looking at getting more seriously into photography, and I want to do it in one go properly (not by getting a beginning DSLR into another one, etc). I want to make sure before I make this purchase that the Canon 6D and the 24-105mm lens kit really are a great choice to go with. I feel as though a full-frame camera is the way to go, and this seems to be a good entry-level price. The price is still steep for me though, so I'm making sure I do this all correctly. Thanks for any help & insight.

*Back-story to explain how much I know:*
I'm new to higher-end DSLR photography. I've only ever owned one cheap camera back seven or so years ago, although I've played around with some higher-end point-and-shoot cameras. I do have a Galaxy S4 now, and I feel as though the camera (in good lighting) is extremely good, and it has served as a fun point-and-shoot that (again, in the right lighting) seems to rival the point-and-shoots that I've played with. My girlfriend recently picked up a Nikon 1 J3 (she wanted a cross-over between a DSLR and a point-and-shoot), and I've been quite interested in the step up she has been able to take with photography. Overall, I'm simply interested in taking much better photos.

I'm experienced with photoshop (if there's a guide, I can follow it nearly without pausing the video -- I know my way around -- so I learn new things in a pinch). I used to work with photoshop as 50% of my job description for a year. However, I didn't do much real-life photo editing. I'm also quite a bit of a perfectionist, and when I get into something, I tend to want to enter into things at a higher level than most. I believe that buying something like a Rebel T3i or a Nikon D7100 might leave me a little bit sour and wanting more right off the bat.

I was comparing the Nikon 600D and the Canon 6D, and I found that the Canon 6D seems to offer a little bit more on the glass side of things... it has seemingly a better weather seal / build construction (no oil spots)... and its low-light performance is superb. I would likely have chosen a Nikon 600D if I hadn't heard about the oil-spot issues, but after hearing about that, I read more into the 6D and have liked what I've been reading.

*My question and to the point:*
$2400 is no small price to pay for an amateur who is looking to pick up a new hobby. To me, getting a new camera is 50% a new hobby, and 50% deciding that I want to capture moments in my life and those I care about in higher quality (something that a lot of people don't realize they care about until after the fact). I was looking at $1200 camera + lens kits as the price-point that seemed reasonable, but I realized that once I'm already breaking that $1000 barrier, I need to be absolutely content with my purchase. I feel as though the 6D offers performance that I can be content with for over half a decade without feeling the need to upgrade. The lens selection looks excellent, and starting with a 24-105mm lens seems to be a great way to go (the bundled price is excellent). I don't want something that carries with it good resale value (I don't expect good resale value in 5 years!); I want something that leaves me not wanting more 5 years down the line as an amateur photographer who never plans to go professional... lenses aside, of course. 

Would you recommend the Canon 6D as a great full-frame entry-level camera that won't leave an amateur wanting more? Would you say it's a waste in any way if I end up actually using the camera quite frequently? When I make a purchase, I need to feel good about it. 

There's two other questions I have:
1) The autofocus points have been something people have complained about. Should this concern me in the long-run?
2) The dynamic contrast range, compared to something like the Nikon 600D, has been criticized in some reviews. Does anyone have input on this?

My plan is to pick up this camera alongside the 24-105mm lens kit, and from there make my decision on lenses as I go very carefully.

One final thing: I haven't found any good reads on camera lenses and longevity (regarding compatibility, not motor life). I'm always told to "build your lens collection first" and "put cash into lenses first!", however I also hear that lenses are only compatible with their respective lines of cameras. So what I'm confused about is what happens when a camera lens no longer has new camera bodies being released for it? How does that work? Do camera lenses die out when their compatible camera bodies are no longer made? If I were to build up a collection of camera lenses compatible with a Canon 6D, where would I be left (option-wise) in the future?

Thanks!


----------



## CouncilmanDoug

lens wise, you'll probably be fine with good canon/nikon lenses for a long time, ancient manual focus nikon mount lenses can still be used on modern nikon bodys, nikon or canon are the safest lenses to buy into for sure, aren't going out of business in the forseeable future


----------



## Derrel

You will enjoy the pair, very much, I suspect.


----------



## Gavjenks

Focus points:  Do you take photos of tiny, extremely fast moving things all the time?  If not, I would not concern myself with 11 versus 482,113 focus points.   If I point my 6d in the general direction of a lone flying seagull, and have it on servo focus using all points, and a lens with USM focus on it, it will lock on in under 1 second in decent light.  Maybe if you do mostly birding or coverage of American Gladiators, then sure, worry about that.  Otherwise, for a general interest amateur, it's absolutely fine.

Dynamic range... Don't worry about this.  1) The 6d is already about equally as good as the human eye in dynamic range (if you disregard retinal pigment bleaching i.e. human ISO, and pupil changing). How much do you really need...?  2) If another camera has the same RAW bitrate as Canon, then it's not necessarily "better" to have more dynamic range anyway, because you're stretching the data thinner.  With = bitrate, higher DR means coarser recording of lightness and color values.  It's a tradeoff, not absolutely better or worse. 3) With any digital camera, you can just look at the histogram right after shooting, and easily adjust it, which effectively gives modern DSLRs another many stops of practical dynamic range, since you can adapt on the fly to put your 12 EVs right where they should be. 4) If you have adjusted based on histogram, and you still don't have enough range, change the lighting.  A $200 flash is much cheaper than a $3000 more expensive camera, and can bring the shadows up by many stops alone.

So you already have the power to adjust your exposure about + or - 15 to 20 stops in either direction by adjusting settings and using lighting, and you have as much dynamic range as a static eye and more flexibility than an eye. Compared to all that, is the difference of 1 or 2 stops between cameras of internal range really very important?  No, not so much.  Especially when more range also comes with a tradeoff of coarser data.


----------



## CowgirlMama

I have the 6D and am waiting to get the 24-105. I've used my dad's lens. You'll enjoy it. The 6D is *almost* as good as the Mark III. Very close. I love it and intend to have this camera for years. I figure, at most, I'll upgrade lenses. The body itself is plenty to grow with.


----------



## Gavjenks

Oh, and if you are shooting a non-moving subject, you can also use HDR, which can increase your single image dynamic range by up to *10 stops* (+/-5 is allowed in exposure compensation and bracketing, for 22 total).  And in good lighting, you can do your entire bracketed set all handheld.

AND if that's something you like to do a lot, you could even set full HDR handheld bracketing with all necessary settings to one of your custom modes (C1 or C2) and have ti ready at a moment's notice for any shot.


If 22 stops of range (centered flexibly to fit the scene) is not enough for you, then you probably have bigger issues to worry about.  Like the fact that you're probably in the process of being abducted by aliens with futuristic light technology.  Or about to crash into the sun in your out of control rocket ship.


----------



## Juga

I am about to purchase my 6D with 'kit' lens 24-105 in just a couple of days. What I did was go to a store and played around with the 6D and 5DIII for a couple of hours. The 5DIII is an incredible camera but the 6D is also fantastic as far as image quality. I am not going to be disappointed one bit and the reason is that I am not a professional but I definitely wanted a full frame Canon. The low light performance is so good that the 24-105 f/4L isn't going to be limiting and is a good range from the wide end to the telephoto end. If you are an amatuer like myself then I can't see how you would be disappointed with the 6D but I would suggest to find a store where you can go and test the camera out for yourself.


----------



## JBrown

I hate to say it, but unless you already have gear the d600 is the superior camera. It does have oil spot issues, bit you just clean them every now and then. While the 6d's af system nay not limit you in every shot, what about the times it does. Why buy it when there is a camera with a better af system for the same price.


----------



## Juga

JBrown said:


> I hate to say it, but unless you already have gear the d600 is the superior camera. It does have oil spot issues, bit you just clean them every now and then. While the 6d's af system nay not limit you in every shot, what about the times it does. Why buy it when there is a camera with a better af system for the same price.



The 6D produces MUCH better high ISO performance.... I wouldn't call it superior


----------



## stevensondrive

I love my 6D with the 24-105. I looked at the 5DIII but decided the 6D was more suited for my needs. In the last few days of our vacation out in SD I've taken over 1100 pictures using this camera. There are lots of features to learn and help perfect the pictures.  I'm quite satisfied with my 6D


----------



## gsgary

Juga said:


> The 6D produces MUCH better high ISO performance.... I wouldn't call it superior



In the other thread he said he had not used the 6D, take everything he quotes with a pinch of salt


----------



## JBrown

gsgary said:


> Juga said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 6D produces MUCH better high ISO performance.... I wouldn't call it superior
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the other thread he said he had not used the 6D, take everything he quotes with a pinch of salt
Click to expand...


Actually I sat in bestbuy for about a hour demoing both of them. Obviously limited scope of testing , but got to go hands on with both side by side extensively in that context.

Combined with the fact I've read or watched about twenty reviews on the cameras makes me somewhat familiar with them.

Through MY research I determined for ME the D600 is the better camera.

I will say one thing many people don't mention is how much better the ergonomics of the 6d is. It may just be my familiarity with canon systems, but I much preferred the 6d.

I doubt you'll find many people who have used both extensively to give a honest opinion outside of reviewrs.

Got to love the cross thread fact checking by gsgary, thumbs up.


----------



## Juga

JBrown said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Juga said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 6D produces MUCH better high ISO performance.... I wouldn't call it superior
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the other thread he said he had not used the 6D, take everything he quotes with a pinch of salt
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually I sat in bestbuy for about a hour demoing both of them. Obviously limited scope of testing , but got to go hands on with both side by side extensively in that context.
> 
> Combined with the fact I've read or watched about twenty reviews on the cameras makes me somewhat familiar with them.
> 
> Through MY research I determined for ME the D600 is the better camera.
> 
> I will say one thing many people don't mention is how much better the ergonomics of the 6d is. It may just be my familiarity with canon systems, but I much preferred the 6d.
> 
> I doubt you'll find many people who have used both extensively to give a honest opinion outside of reviewrs.
> 
> Got to love the cross thread fact checking by gsgary, thumbs up.
Click to expand...


Having played with both I think they both have their ups and downs but for you to say that the d600 is superior is crazy...I think it comes down to what type of shooting someone does and for me the 6d is great


----------



## PaulWog

So I've decided the 6D is definitely for me. The only downside I feel is there is the slower focusing at high speed shots, which baffles me at this price-point. That aside, I like the camera.

Where I'm confused now is the 24-105mm lens kit. I've read that it is subject to 4.6% (I believe?) distortion... and it suffers from this barrel distortion significantly to the point at which the 24mm setting seems rather pointless. This leaves me wondering if skipping that lens and shelling out for the 24-70mm is just better (but that's a $600 bump in price). I *really* want the 24-105mm lens option to work (and for it to work for all its intents and purposes; not end up being crippled at the 24mm setting).


----------



## stevensondrive

I have been verrry happy with my 6D.


----------



## munecito

I have the 5d3 and the 6d.

The 6d is with me every day and everywhere. I absolutely love the camera and the fact that is smaller and lighter.

My 5d3 is used in studio, as a main camera on location and as a video camera.

Can't fault any of them really.

People complains about the autofocus all the time. Yes it only has one crossed hair but that one is a really good and fast one when used with a fast lens.  Digital medium format cameras only have one autofocus point and nobody complains. The fact is that unless you are going to shoot fast moving subjects the additional focus points are not a must have.

I really don't think you are going to outgrow the camera unless you need the extra stop in shutter speed, the two thirds for flash synch speed or a flash sync port (which I admit it should have). 

The first two can be overcome with HSS and some other optical slave hacks, the second one is only important if you want the reliability of the cable over wireless or if you are shooting in a shared studio and can't use cell in the external flashes and don't have extra wireless slaves.


----------



## Biev

I've been using the 24-105mm for a few months now and I absolutely love it.  Images have very good quality, and the zoom range of the lens makes it quite versatile in different situations.  The only thing I would improve if I could, would be a 2.8 aperture instead of 4.0 for a somewhat better portrait bokeh.  Still, I've seen wedding photographers on YouTube (and yes, I'm aware that anyone could claim to be a wedding photographer there) say they include the 24-105 in their bag.

The lens does seem to have noticeable barrel distortion at 24mm, with even seems to turn into a very slight amount of pincushion distortion when you zoom in.


----------



## munecito

I find the 24-105 f4 to be sharper than the 24-70 f2.8 MK I.

I haven't tried the MK II but I have heard good things. I have also heard praises for the tamrom 24-70 f2.8 IS.

Would love to try the last two to compare to the first two and decide which one is superior.


----------



## Juga

These are my first panning shots ever and with the 6D nonetheless. Center focus point...I think not too bad especially considering the speed at which these cars were traveling. 
View attachment 49945View attachment 49946

***and with the 24-105 f/4L!!***


----------



## grafxman

I have taken several thousand photos with the 6D and the kit lens. I'm less than happy with the lens because of its limited zoom range. I used the Sigma 18-250mm lens on my 7D for many years. The closest I could come a similar lens for the 6D is the Tamron 28-300mm. The Tamron doesn't focus too good in low light and often refuses to focus at all. The camera itself is fine. I love the low noise at high ISO values it provides. Just a few minutes ago I dug out an old Kenko 1.4 teleconverter and installed it on the kit lens. It focuses OK but I had to tape the last 3 pins over on the TC to get things to work properly. Now that I have a little zoom power I'm really looking forward to my next museum expedition.


----------



## Biev

grafxman said:


> I have taken several thousand photos with the 6D and the kit lens. I'm less than happy with the lens because of its limited zoom range. I used the Sigma 18-250mm lens on my 7D for many years. The closest I could come a similar lens for the 6D is the Tamron 28-300mm. The Tamron doesn't focus too good in low light and often refuses to focus at all. The camera itself is fine. I love the low noise at high ISO values it provides. Just a few minutes ago I dug out an old Kenko 1.4 teleconverter and installed it on the kit lens. It focuses OK but I had to tape the last 3 pins over on the TC to get things to work properly. Now that I have a little zoom power I'm really looking forward to my next museum expedition.



It's strange that you need to tape off the pins.  I haven't worked with the Kenko TC, but I'd expect it to reduce your max aperture by only one stop, just like the Canon TC.  In which case you'd end up with an f5.6, which should still allow AF even on an entry-level x00D or xx0D (like 600D or 650D) body without having to tape off the pins.


----------



## grafxman

Biev said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have taken several thousand photos with the 6D and the kit lens. I'm less than happy with the lens because of its limited zoom range. I used the Sigma 18-250mm lens on my 7D for many years. The closest I could come a similar lens for the 6D is the Tamron 28-300mm. The Tamron doesn't focus too good in low light and often refuses to focus at all. The camera itself is fine. I love the low noise at high ISO values it provides. Just a few minutes ago I dug out an old Kenko 1.4 teleconverter and installed it on the kit lens. It focuses OK but I had to tape the last 3 pins over on the TC to get things to work properly. Now that I have a little zoom power I'm really looking forward to my next museum expedition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's strange that you need to tape off the pins. I haven't worked with the Kenko TC, but I'd expect it to reduce your max aperture by only one stop, just like the Canon TC. In which case you'd end up with an f5.6, which should still allow AF even on an entry-level x00D or xx0D (like 600D or 650D) body without having to tape off the pins.
Click to expand...


The 6D won't work at all until the 3 pins are taped. After you do that everything works normally. The procedure has to be done with many other Canon cameras for autofocus to function. Frankly I think it's completely ridiculous that Canon teleconverters only work on a few of their lenses, mostly non-zoom lens. Sometimes I really wonder about who's driving the boat at Canon.


----------



## Biev

grafxman said:


> Biev said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 6D won't work at all until the 3 pins are taped. After you do that everything works normally. The procedure has to be done with many other Canon cameras for autofocus to function. Frankly I think it's completely ridiculous that Canon teleconverters only work on a few of their lenses, mostly non-zoom lens. Sometimes I really wonder about who's driving the boat at Canon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The teleconverters decrease your aperture by 1 (for a 1.4x) or 2 (for a 2x) stops.  And beyond f5.6 (f8 for the 1D and the 5D with the latest firmware), AF has difficulties focusing due to the decreased light (which means that decreasing aperture in-camera must work in a different way, as AF does not seem to suffer under that).  Canon simply blocks AF beyond that point, and I can more or less understand that.  Using the f4.5-f5.6 100-400mm on my 600D with a 1.4x TC, I usually just disabled AF at maximum zoom, even with taped off pins to unblock AF again, because it was pretty much useless.
> 
> Other brands of cameras seem to suffer similar issues.  So the only thing that really baffles me here is that you already seem to suffer from this issue at lower f-stops.
Click to expand...


----------



## grafxman

Biev said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biev said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 6D won't work at all until the 3 pins are taped. After you do that everything works normally. The procedure has to be done with many other Canon cameras for autofocus to function. Frankly I think it's completely ridiculous that Canon teleconverters only work on a few of their lenses, mostly non-zoom lens. Sometimes I really wonder about who's driving the boat at Canon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The teleconverters decrease your aperture by 1 (for a 1.4x) or 2 (for a 2x) stops. And beyond f5.6 (f8 for the 1D and the 5D with the latest firmware), AF has difficulties focusing due to the decreased light (which means that decreasing aperture in-camera must work in a different way, as AF does not seem to suffer under that). Canon simply blocks AF beyond that point, and I can more or less understand that. Using the f4.5-f5.6 100-400mm on my 600D with a 1.4x TC, I usually just disabled AF at maximum zoom, even with taped off pins to unblock AF again, because it was pretty much useless.
> 
> Other brands of cameras seem to suffer similar issues. So the only thing that really baffles me here is that you already seem to suffer from this issue at lower f-stops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I said: "The 6D won't work at all until the 3 pins are taped. After you do that *everything works normally*." I don't know what you are referring to when you say I suffer from an issue at lower f-stops. The lens under discussion is the Canon 24-105mm kit lens on the 6D when using the Kenko 1.4 teleconverter not the 100-400mm lens on a 600D.
Click to expand...


----------



## Biev

I was referring to the 600D to illustrate that AF even works on low-end bodies with extenders (up to f5.6).

Apart from one short mention (Flickr: Discussing Extenders in Canon EOS 6D - Official Group), I can't find much in terms of 6D + extender issues on Google.  I'd expect to find many more complaints if there was a general issue, so I'd consider the possibility that:

1. There is an issue with your specific 6D, or
2. There is an issue with your specific extender, or
3. There is an issue with the specific combination of the 6D used with the Kenko TC


----------



## grafxman

Biev said:


> I was referring to the 600D to illustrate that AF even works on low-end bodies with extenders (up to f5.6).
> 
> Apart from one short mention (Flickr: Discussing Extenders in Canon EOS 6D - Official Group), I can't find much in terms of 6D + extender issues on Google. I'd expect to find many more complaints if there was a general issue, so I'd consider the possibility that:
> 
> 1. There is an issue with your specific 6D, or
> 2. There is an issue with your specific extender, or
> 3. There is an issue with the specific combination of the 6D used with the Kenko TC



I doubt that many folks use a Kenko TC on the 6D yet. If they've been messing about with Canons as long as I have and have internet experience they'll soon resolve the issue. In any case the taping of 3 pins on Kenko TCs has been done for many years to get them to work properly with Canon cameras. Since this seems to be of interest to you I provide the following links:

some dont report TC due to tape pin to allow AF: Canon SLR Lens Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

5D MK3 : Compatible TC: Canon EOS-1D / 5D / 6D Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

D30/D60 Tips and Techniques

As you can see some of these posts are several years old. It's been a problem with some, but not all, Canon cameras for a long time. Fortunately it's easily solved and there is plenty of information with numerous photos showing how to do it on the net. In any event it appears number 3 on your list is the correct answer.


----------



## Gavjenks

Biev said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biev said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 6D won't work at all until the 3 pins are taped. After you do that everything works normally. The procedure has to be done with many other Canon cameras for autofocus to function. Frankly I think it's completely ridiculous that Canon teleconverters only work on a few of their lenses, mostly non-zoom lens. Sometimes I really wonder about who's driving the boat at Canon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The teleconverters decrease your aperture by 1 (for a 1.4x) or 2 (for a 2x) stops.  And beyond f5.6 (f8 for the 1D and the 5D with the latest firmware), AF has difficulties focusing due to the decreased light (which means that decreasing aperture in-camera must work in a different way, as AF does not seem to suffer under that).  Canon simply blocks AF beyond that point, and I can more or less understand that.  Using the f4.5-f5.6 100-400mm on my 600D with a 1.4x TC, I usually just disabled AF at maximum zoom, even with taped off pins to unblock AF again, because it was pretty much useless.
> 
> Other brands of cameras seem to suffer similar issues.  So the only thing that really baffles me here is that you already seem to suffer from this issue at lower f-stops.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> My autofocus on my 6D routinely works even when I have an 11-stop neutral density filter stacked on top of a 2 stop darkening CPL filter in front of my f/4 lens.
> Equivalent wide open aperture in this situation in terms of light collection alone = *f/362*
> And it can still autofocus for the most part (in live view most effectively, but even sometimes normally if the subject is bright enough)
> 
> The stated required aperture has nothing to do with the extreme operating limits of the AF system. It only has to do with the boundaries of where Canon is willing to make *guarantees *about AF working.  It is ridiculous for them to force us to operate within their own guarantee limits when the actual limits are vastly wider. Simple advertising of the limits of their guarantee and thus removal of any responsbility or liability for reduced performance should be sufficient.  Mechanical/electrical barriers are absurd.
Click to expand...


----------



## Biev

Thank you both.  This is good information!


----------



## CyraD

PaulWog said:


> So I've decided the 6D is definitely for me. The only downside I feel is there is the slower focusing at high speed shots, which baffles me at this price-point. That aside, I like the camera.
> 
> Where I'm confused now is the 24-105mm lens kit. I've read that it is subject to 4.6% (I believe?) distortion... and it suffers from this barrel distortion significantly to the point at which the 24mm setting seems rather pointless. This leaves me wondering if skipping that lens and shelling out for the 24-70mm is just better (but that's a $600 bump in price). I *really* want the 24-105mm lens option to work (and for it to work for all its intents and purposes; not end up being crippled at the 24mm setting).



Im in a similar situation as yourself: I need to upgrade but cant decide whether to go for 6D especially since photography is just a hobby. should i spend so much money for this full frame? I shoot mostly low light, landscape, family birthdays and weddings, macro... 
so how was your experience? Happy with the performance? any regrets? major drawbacks? focusing problems?

and how different was it when shifting from crop sensor to full frame?


----------



## PaulWog

To the response: I went with Nikon (the D5200) back in July soon after this thread. I now do want a full-frame camera. However, if I picked up the Canon 6D back then, I'd likely have made some mistakes with my lens purchases, and I'd probably have wasted some money picking up some dumb stuff.

Going with the D5200, the one bad purchase I've made is an expensive kit lens: the 16-85mm VR. I enjoy it, it's a good lens, it's sharp and renders pleasing bokeh at 85mm... but I'd prefer a fast 50mm (or 35mm on crop) lens as my walk-around over a slow zoom lens. I like shallow depth of field, I like bokeh!

As far as the actually hardware goes, I'd have no qualms putting money down for a Canon 6D or a Nikon D610, were I to get fully refunded for my 16-85 and D5200. But given what I've got, I also have no issue with waiting it out for something newer/better in the future (or a nice chunky price drop if there ever will be one).


----------



## CyraD

Oh! Its a bit disheartening to know you didn't go for 6d. I was hoping for a raving review as the one final push to help me in my decision. 

thanks for the quick reply!

*the research continues*


----------



## EIngerson

Derrel said:


> You will enjoy the pair, very much, I suspect.



^^^^ What he said.


----------



## Justman1020

CyraD said:


> Oh! Its a bit disheartening to know you didn't go for 6d. I was hoping for a raving review as the one final push to help me in my decision.
> 
> thanks for the quick reply!
> 
> *the research continues*



You want a raving review? I own one. I won't put it down. I was torn between the 6D and the 5dMkiii but the savings in the 1000 $ range is well worth just going with the 6d. My biggest complaint isn't even the focus points. I love the focus point's. I think they do great, in low light especially, My biggest complaint however is the fact that it won't write to two memory cards at once. (Only one slot)

The camera is great in low light. Attached is a unedited (completely, straight from camera, in JPEG) photo from on the Tower of Terror at Disney's Hollywood Studios, in the boiler room (Right before you board the elevator) which is one of disney's darkest "rooms"




IMG_6311 by Jsl_Photography, on Flickr


CameraCanon EOS 6DExposure0.125 sec (1/8)Aperturef/4.0Focal Length60 mmISO Speed12800Exposure Bias0 EVFlashOff, Did not fire


----------

