# Is a 6D the = of the Nikon D600?



## hassiman

I am in the market for a new FF and M not invested in either system.

I have heard the optics and customer service is better with Canon but the NikonD600 has more DR.

I also know that some D600 bodies have had sensor dust problems.

Which should I buy?


----------



## Dinardy

Nikon D600
DxOMark - Nikon D600



Canon 6D
DxOMark - Canon EOS 6D


For me... The D600 but I may be biased


----------



## play18now

I'm generally of the opinion that if either Canon or Nikon was truly better than the other, the lesser brand wouldn't have as good of a business as both do.  For me, I learned on a Canon, so I was familiar with the system and the interface, so I went with a Canon.  If you aren't invested in either, I would go to a good camera store and spend some time with both and decide that way.  If you can't get to a camera store, pick it based on what is more important to you.  I've never shot a Nikon so I can't really comment on what the true differences are, but I'm sure you can get plenty of opinions here.  I know there are people who say that the optics are _slightly _better with Canon.  I'm probably not good enough to notice the difference, and there are lots of people who take phenomenal pictures and make a good living with both.


----------



## DarkShadow

Here is a review video by Jared polin that cover stills and video on the Canon 6D.


----------



## Derrel

Pretty good for a Canon. Maybe some day Canon will be able to break the 13 EV barrier on Dynamic Range.


----------



## gsgary

Yes it is, more important is the photographer and his vision, dont waste your time looking at charts its out in real life that matters, my best cameras have no auto focus light meter but are a joy to use and i get more shots in focus most rolls there are non out of focus


----------



## ScubaDude

Of greater importance is which brand makes the lenses and other accessories (flash systems, etc.) you're likely to want, and which camera has the features you'll need.


----------



## Juga

Despite what the Dxo Mark says the 6D is much better than the D600 at high ISO levels. I don't have my test shots from the D600 anymore when I was doing research but here is a shot from my 6D at 20000 ISO and minimal noise reduction. The D600 has its advantages and so does the 6D so really what it comes down to is what trade offs are you willing to sacrifice. The ergonomics on the 6D are fantastic and while the AF system only has one cross type point that one cross type point is VERY good. For the type of photography that I do the 6D was a better choice.


----------



## goodguy

You sir has what I like to call rich people problems.
Its like asking what should I buy a Mercedes or BMW.

I cant afford either so I don't have your dilemma problem (wish I did).

Here are my thoughts and important points

1.Overall according to reviews I read and saw the D600 is the better camera
2.6D low light performance is amazing!!!
3.While the 6D low light performance is better the D600 low light performance are very, very good!!! probably more then what I will ever need for most occasions.
4.6D has no flash
5.D600 has in few of its cameras dust oil spec problems
6.As said by others D600 Dynamic Range is better then 6D
7.D600 has better AF system

You really cant go wrong with either.

If not for the oil/dust issue in very few of the D600 I would say with no hesitation go with the D600, that's the only thing that slightly bothers me.
This issue is really blown out of proportions, you really can clean the sensor yourself at home and after few thousand clicks it goes away and that in case you encounter the problem in the first place.
Again most D600 users don't have this dust/oil problem but it is important to add this to your overall argument pro and con with these cameras.

Good luck


----------



## jaomul

On paper the D600 is the winner. In real life the 6d seems to do better than its specs suggest and there are a lot of happy 6d users. It has been said over and over that they are clise enough to both be good choices. I would in your shoes do a little research into the specs and what you need. I would make sure the brand has the specific lenses I wanted and err towards the one that suited


----------



## DarkShadow

I think the canon 6D is one hell of a camera but 1 cross type in the autofocus and no on board flash really hurts it over the D600.However I really like the 6D with a 24-105 combo kit.


----------



## Juga

DarkShadow said:


> I think the canon 6D is one hell of a camera but 1 cross type in the autofocus and no on board flash really hurts it over the D600.However I really like the 6D with a 24-105 combo kit.



On board flash is overrated and that 1 cross type is VERY good. It is beating a dead horse but everyone has preferences and this is a very subjective question. However, I agree the 6D is a helluva camera.


----------



## DarkShadow

Juga said:


> DarkShadow said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think the canon 6D is one hell of a camera but 1 cross type in the autofocus and no on board flash really hurts it over the D600.However I really like the 6D with a 24-105 combo kit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On board flash is overrated and that 1 cross type is VERY good. It is beating a dead horse but everyone has preferences and this is a very subjective question. However, I agree the 6D is a helluva camera.
Click to expand...


I want one.:mrgreen: I am not invested to far with Nikon either but I would still keep my D90 for some bird shots.


----------



## rexbobcat

Derrel said:


> View attachment 51489
> 
> Pretty good for a Canon. Maybe some day Canon will be able to break the 13 EV barrier on Dynamic Range.



Because these numbers are, like, totally applicable to real world use.

The Nikon is better, I think, because Nikon really didn't try and gimp their 'lesser' full frame camera like Canon did, but there are better ways to determine this than by looking at DxOMark.


----------



## Mach0

Juga said:


> On board flash is overrated and that 1 cross type is VERY good.



It's nice for commander in nikons CLS.


----------



## Juga

Mach0 said:


> Juga said:
> 
> 
> 
> On board flash is overrated and that 1 cross type is VERY good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's nice for commander in nikons CLS.
Click to expand...


All threads like this are subjective because everyone has their preferences. My preference is to use wireless triggers or use a speedlite as a master like the 580EX II or the 600EX-RT. I, personally, don't find myself saying, "Wish I had on-board flash right about now..."


----------



## Derrel

rexbobcat said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 51489
> 
> Pretty good for a Canon. Maybe some day Canon will be able to break the 13 EV barrier on Dynamic Range.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because these numbers are, like, totally applicable to real world use.
> 
> The Nikon is better, I think, because Nikon really didn't try and gimp their 'lesser' full frame camera like Canon did, but there are better ways to determine this than by looking at DxOMark.
Click to expand...


Yes...the numbers are applicable to real-world use. Two more full EV value of dynamic range is a big deal. The expansion of *useable* dynamic range, as well as the expansion of *recoverable highlight headroom,* is the single largest factor that sets the new-generation Nikons apart from Canon's sub-par sensors. A second area is recoverable shadow detail. The new, Sony-made sensors, and the electronics Nikon has developed, mean that in RAW file shooting, the quality of the sensor information has big, real-world impacts when you shoot a shot, and need to either recover highlights, OR "lift" the shadows in post.

Yes...the numbers reflect a HUGE advantage for the Nikon in terms of Scene Dynamic Range. Canon  is still using outdated sensor fabrication technology, and has been "stuck" there since 2009. That's why Canon cannot even break the top 10 in sensor performance...their sensor fabrication is outdated. That's why they have been unable to even try and get to 36MP--their sensor fab tech and ON-CHIP noise reduction is at a dead end.


----------



## gsgary

Derrel said:


> Yes...the numbers are applicable to real-world use. Two more full EV value of dynamic range is a big deal. The expansion of useable dynamic range, as well as the expansion of recoverable highlight headroom, is the single largest factor that sets the new-generation Nikons apart from Canon's sub-par sensors. A second area is recoverable shadow detail. The new, Sony-made sensors, and the electronics Nikon has developed, mean that in RAW file shooting, the quality of the sensor information has big, real-world impacts when you shoot a shot, and need to either recover highlights, OR "lift" the shadows in post.
> 
> Yes...the numbers reflect a HUGE advantage for the Nikon in terms of Scene Dynamic Range. Canon  is still using outdated sensor fabrication technology, and has been "stuck" there since 2009. That's why Canon cannot even break the top 10 in sensor performance...their sensor fabrication is outdated. That's why they have been unable to even try and get to 36MP--their sensor fab tech and ON-CHIP noise reduction is at a dead end.



Heard it all before, have you heard about the new high mp camera coming out soon


----------



## goodguy

gsgary said:


> Heard it all before, have you heard about the new high mp camera coming out soon


Higher MP ?

OMG isnt 24MP enough ?
How much more can we take, soon every raw picture I take will be 100MB per picture, we will need to buy 128GB cards just for few shots, 

Who the heck needs more MP ?

(its a retorical question no need to answer that LOL)


----------



## gsgary

goodguy said:


> Higher MP ?
> 
> OMG isnt 24MP enough ?
> How much more can we take, soon every raw picture I take will be 100MB per picture, we will need to buy 128GB cards just for few shots,
> 
> Who the heck needs more MP ?
> 
> (its a retorical question no need to answer that LOL)



I have read it is 75mp


----------



## goodguy

gsgary said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Higher MP ?
> 
> OMG isnt 24MP enough ?
> How much more can we take, soon every raw picture I take will be 100MB per picture, we will need to buy 128GB cards just for few shots,
> 
> Who the heck needs more MP ?
> 
> (its a retorical question no need to answer that LOL)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have read it is 75mp
Click to expand...


After reading your post I found the rumor is indeed 75MP
I think for the casual user this is (in my eyes) completly and utterly useless, pointless and silly (again thats what I think).
Maybe some pros will find this important and usefull but for me I wouldnt want it at all, files Waaaaaaaayyyyyyy too big for my needs.
My 16MP old D7000 was enough, my new 24MP of the D7100 is already an over kill, more then that is pointless and a waste, like putting 12 cylinder huge engine on a Honda civic-why would you need that ?


----------



## jaomul

goodguy said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Higher MP ?
> 
> OMG isnt 24MP enough ?
> How much more can we take, soon every raw picture I take will be 100MB per picture, we will need to buy 128GB cards just for few shots,
> 
> Who the heck needs more MP ?
> 
> (its a retorical question no need to answer that LOL)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have read it is 75mp
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> After reading your post I found the rumor is indeed 75MP
> I think for the casual user this is (in my eyes) completly and utterly useless, pointless and silly (again thats what I think).
> Maybe some pros will find this important and usefull but for me I wouldnt want it at all, files Waaaaaaaayyyyyyy too big for my needs.
> My 16MP old D7000 was enough, my new 24MP of the D7100 is already an over kill, more then that is pointless and a waste, like putting 12 cylinder huge engine on a Honda civic-why would you need that ?
Click to expand...


This 75mp sensor is a different design than canons normal as far as I can make out. It combines to make up a 25mp image from 3 different sensor layers. Also I could be wrong. It probably be interesting and similar to sigmas foveon sensor


----------



## Richichi

OK here's another opinion, take it for whatever it's worth .... If HIGH ISO & Video are high on your list than go with Canon, If everything else is high on your list IQ, Color, Dynamic range than the choice is Nikon  but realize there is really no wrong answers here !! Good Luck !!


----------



## goodguy

Richichi said:


> OK here's another opinion, take it for whatever it's worth .... If HIGH ISO & Video are high on your list than go with Canon, If everything else is high on your list IQ, Color, Dynamic range than the choice is Nikon  but realize there is really no wrong answers here !! Good Luck !!



Agreed with your statement only you need to add that while the 6D is very good in low light the D600 has also very impressive low light performance.
Its not like you get all the other goodies but you loose a lot in low light performance, you simply loose a bit in low light but just a bit.


----------



## Nahin

It's right that the winner is Nikon D600 and Runner up is Canon 6D. But the strange thing is that 6D has inflexible time focusing on color transition on flat surface in tremendous low light.


----------



## j-digg

goodguy said:


> Richichi said:
> 
> 
> 
> OK here's another opinion, take it for whatever it's worth .... If HIGH ISO & Video are high on your list than go with Canon, If everything else is high on your list IQ, Color, Dynamic range than the choice is Nikon  but realize there is really no wrong answers here !! Good Luck !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed with your statement only you need to add that while the 6D is very good in low light the D600 has also very impressive low light performance.
> Its not like you get all the other goodies but you loose a lot in low light performance, you simply loose a bit in low light but just a bit.
Click to expand...


Well than the same could be said about the IQ of the 6d. It's not like that's a huge difference either.


----------



## o hey tyler

Dinardy said:


> Nikon D600
> DxOMark - Nikon D600
> 
> 
> 
> Canon 6D
> DxOMark - Canon EOS 6D
> 
> For me... The D600 but I may be biased



Look at real world tests between high ISO performance and you'll see the 6D consistently outperforms the D600 by 1.5-2 stops. I rented a 6D for a wedding recently to try it out and it also has quite vast dynamic range.


----------



## Dinardy

o hey tyler said:


> Dinardy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nikon D600
> DxOMark - Nikon D600
> 
> 
> 
> Canon 6D
> DxOMark - Canon EOS 6D
> 
> For me... The D600 but I may be biased
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look at real world tests between high ISO performance and you'll see the 6D consistently outperforms the D600 by 1.5-2 stops. I rented a 6D for a wedding recently to try it out and it also has quite vast dynamic range.
Click to expand...



That was a personal opinion. My post should carry no weight here, hence kinky spank smiley. lol

I only choose Nikon because I now shoot Nikon. My first DSLR was a 40D and it was a hell of a camera.

I was just trying to help!!!


----------



## 6kimages

hassiman said:


> I am in the market for a new FF and M not invested in either system.
> 
> I have heard the optics and customer service is better with Canon but the NikonD600 has more DR.
> 
> I also know that some D600 bodies have had sensor dust problems.
> 
> Which should I buy?


go here and compare  Imaging Resource "Comparometer"  Digital Camera Image Comparison Page


----------



## Smokeyr67

I'd love to be able to buy the best body regardless of brand, but like most, I've got many thousands invested in lenses, flashes and other accessories, so I like Canon

I honestly doubt that your average (or even extreme) photographer will be able to fault either brands in the real world, and to be honest if you are familiar with the o/s of brand "a", you'l spend more time earning brand "b"'s quirks than you will taking photo's


----------



## nickzou

Nikon D600 vs Canon 6D High ISO Candle Images - Michael Andrew Photography Blog

Here's are sample images for the D600 (and by extension the D800 I guess) vs the 6D high ISO. I have no idea where the DxO scores come from but this is pretty definitive. The D600's dynamic range at these higher ISO's is like... 6 colours. And unless there is something I don't know about Nikon's new crazy firmware or some noise reduction or dynamic range re-expansion mega-hyper doodad technology, I have no idea how they could possibly justify those numbers. There's also quite a lengthy YouTube video testing the rest of each camera's capabilities. I watched it once when it came out, _be warned_, it is really long but quite comprehensive.


----------

