canon rumors FORUM

Rumors => EOS Bodies => Topic started by: paulgmccabe on September 17, 2012, 04:04:54 AM

Title: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: paulgmccabe on September 17, 2012, 04:04:54 AM
I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better? How many 5D Mk II owners would swap their camera for the 6D? Are there any advantages the 5D Mk II holds over the 6D?
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: quartzie on September 17, 2012, 04:17:11 AM
I'd wait for real life ISO performance and comparison of the AF systems, otherwise the two cameras appear quite comparable. No mention of AFMA on 6D, which may be an issue on FF sensors - but there's simply not enough info available yet to make an informed decision.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Ricku on September 17, 2012, 04:23:09 AM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: cocopop05 on September 17, 2012, 04:47:23 AM
I suspect with relatively low pixel count on a full frame sensor and Digic 5+, the 6D will have outstanding image quality and great low light performance. That alone should be reason enough for it to exist. 

However I suspect it will still have the typical Canon relatively poor (compared to Nikon) dynamic range.  Also I do not understand why Canon can release a camera today that is USB2, non-UHS SD and has such an antiquated autofocus system.  If the pricing is $1600 US or less, then it would be more palatable. 
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: quartzie on September 17, 2012, 04:52:38 AM
A hidden jewel might be present in the built-in Wi-Fi with Android/iOS remote shooting functionality. I believe that people who love to shoot technically challenging scenes, timelapse and macro photography may find the 6D more than adequate - they rarely use AF anyway.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: dr croubie on September 17, 2012, 04:54:03 AM
If you have a Canon Crop Camera, a few EF-s Lenses and a few EF lenses:
5D2 and another nice EF lens for under $2k.

If you have a Canon crop camera with EFs lenses, or no dslr at all:
D600.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: nicku on September 17, 2012, 05:00:14 AM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

I i didn't had so many Canon glass i had dropped the ship few months ago when 5D3 was announced and go for D800.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: zrz2005101 on September 17, 2012, 05:21:26 AM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.
I want to +1 too but very hard for me to switch as I need to sell all these equips
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: well_dunno on September 17, 2012, 05:24:05 AM
Hi

I have a 5D mk2 and I am definitely not considering getting a 6D. I am sure there will be improvements over the mk 2 but I doubt the improvements would validate an update.

Only body purchase I might consider is the high mp one if it has good DR... I am mainly shooting landscapes, so don't have much of a need for high fps or AF system a la 5D mk3 or 1Dx.

6D is an entry level FF though, I do not think it is aimed at anyone who already has a FF camera...

Cheers!
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Jotho on September 17, 2012, 05:30:46 AM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

I i didn't had so many Canon glass i had dropped the ship few months ago when 5D3 was announced and go for D800.
So Ricku, can you please elaborate on that? What makes you draw to that conclusion? Specs only?

Nicku, next thing for you now is to abandon this forum and go to the Nikon forum instead then.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: TheAshleyJones on September 17, 2012, 05:32:03 AM
Depends.  For me I think the 6D could be a good upgrade form the 5D2.

I only care about the low light handling and image quality.  I have a 5D2 and a 5D3 and in the low light situations I shoot, I have really started to see the difference between both the image quality and - very significantly -  low light focussing abilities.

I couldn't really care less about anything else.  I only ever use the centre focussing point.  But if the low light handling is as good as the 5D3 I think it will make an excellent second body and I guess I will ditch the 5D2.

The thing I would miss on the 5D3 would be the quiet shooting mode.  For quiet gigs, I just love this feature.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: a9000 on September 17, 2012, 05:43:12 AM

The thing I would miss on the 5D3 would be the quiet shooting mode.  For quiet gigs, I just love this feature.

6D has this feature, according to dpreview.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Mark1 on September 17, 2012, 05:45:10 AM
I've recently bought a 5D2 and having seen the price of the 5D3 and the specs of the 6D I can honestly say I'm pretty happy with where I'm sitting.

As for the people who suddenly think Canon are crap - yeh go and buy a Nikon, please just go and buy one!
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: lola on September 17, 2012, 05:47:36 AM

So Ricku, can you please elaborate on that? What makes you draw to that conclusion? Specs only?

Nicku, next thing for you now is to abandon this forum and go to the Nikon forum instead then.

So, now this forum is only for Canon-loving fanboys, eh?
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: cocopop05 on September 17, 2012, 05:54:56 AM
,I just learned the price is $2100. If I were buying my first DSLR I would think Canon are mad and go for the D600.  For those that may label me a Nikon fanboy, I have just ordered a Canon 5D Mark III.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: ronderick on September 17, 2012, 06:01:18 AM
I'd say the 6D is for those that are contemplating stepping into the realm of FF bodies but are hesitating because the 5D2 is 4 years old.

The 5D2 is where it is, so for those who already own a 5D2, I doubt there's any real substantial reason to upgrade to a 6D (unless you damaged your camera to a point that it's worth the money).

However, I'm pretty sure there's going to be a group of people who is waiting to hunt for a better deal on a brand new 5D2 following the introduction of the 6D.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: benherman on September 17, 2012, 06:05:04 AM
5dii might be cheaper while stock lasts, too similar cameras, pick cheap one I reckon. I'm hoping 5diii comes down in price more before I update my 5dii, but might look at 1dx too coz its cheap for top of the line camera.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Ricku on September 17, 2012, 06:09:31 AM
For those that may label me a Nikon fanboy..
Ignore them. It is they who are the true fanboys.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: steliosk on September 17, 2012, 06:09:45 AM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

+1
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: tron on September 17, 2012, 06:15:31 AM
I have a nice 5DMkII. I would be stupid to swap it for a 6D. Now if someone starts from scratch I guess it could be a 50/50 decision. Personally, I would still choose between a 5D MkII or 5DMkIII (when the price comes down a little).
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Jotho on September 17, 2012, 06:17:19 AM

So Ricku, can you please elaborate on that? What makes you draw to that conclusion? Specs only?

Nicku, next thing for you now is to abandon this forum and go to the Nikon forum instead then.

So, now this forum is only for Canon-loving fanboys, eh?
No, but as any internet forum it is very delicate. People often throw out unsubstantiated opinions for reasons beyond my understanding. Let's keep an adult discussion going instead. Canon will have their reasons for developing and launching the products they do. In my view, Nikon is not leading Canon in the market, if they or you have a different opinion, there are nicer ways to express that. But really, I don't care much who's leading who, I am happy with the stuff I use and it suits my purposes.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on September 17, 2012, 06:19:18 AM
I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better?

You cannot pick up the 6d, it doesn't exist yet. And just that Canon states "December" doesn't mean anything knowing their release schedule problems, the "newly developed sensor" might very well produce a delay.

I'd wait for real life ISO performance and comparison of the AF systems, otherwise the two cameras appear quite comparable. No mention of AFMA on 6D, which may be an issue on FF sensors

6d has afma (and silent shutter, gps, wifi over the 5d2).

Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

Actually Canon specs implies that the 6d has *no* cross sensor at all if you're using a f2.8 lens - if this is correct it would be arrogant beyond belief and a measure to protect the "pro" 5d3 at all costs.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Albi86 on September 17, 2012, 06:29:52 AM


Actually Canon specs implies that the 6d has *no* cross sensor at all if you're using a f2.8 lens - if this is correct it would be arrogant beyond belief and a measure to protect the "pro" 5d3 at all costs.

Found this:

Quote
A cross-type sensor with an f/2.8-sensitive horizontal line and an f/5.6-sensitive vertical line will function as a cross-type sensor with an f/2.8 or faster lens, but if you use a slower lens, you'll still have a functional AF point (but with only single-line orientation).


http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx)
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: 7enderbender on September 17, 2012, 09:38:30 AM
I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better? How many 5D Mk II owners would swap their camera for the 6D? Are there any advantages the 5D Mk II holds over the 6D?

Obviously, I haven't seen the 6D yet and all of this is a matter of personal preferences anyway. But from the specs I haven't seen anything whatsoever that would get me interested in the 6D. So without seeing it I would chose the 5DII any day over a smaller camera that loses out on a few important points: shutter speed, viewfinder coverage, sync speed - without offering anything really useful in return. And all that at a (currently) higher price? Nah, I wouldn't consider for second swapping my 5DII. In fact, if I had extra cash right now I'd be looking to pick up a second body and store it away. It pretty much does everything I need it to do which I haven't seen a reason yet to swap it for a MarkIII (though that one is really really nice).
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Musouka on September 17, 2012, 10:01:11 AM
Also I do not understand why Canon can release a camera today that is USB2, non-UHS SD and has such an antiquated autofocus system.

Let us not distort the facts. Canon's literature says that UHS-I is supported.

For FF cameras of similar form factor, only the Nikon D800 has USB3. Sony A99, Nikon D600 and Canon's offerings all have USB2.

I guess there are no good excuses for the lackluster AF module.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: bdunbar79 on September 17, 2012, 10:15:29 AM
I have a nice 5DMkII. I would be stupid to swap it for a 6D. Now if someone starts from scratch I guess it could be a 50/50 decision. Personally, I would still choose between a 5D MkII or 5DMkIII (when the price comes down a little).

I agree here.  I don't think the 6D is for 5D Mark II owners.  I suppose the upgrade for 5D Mark II owners was intended to be the Mark III or maybe some other high MP camera down the road.  The 6D I feel is for those who are entering FF for the first time.  Can you compare which is better?  Well, I don't know, maybe the 6D with a Digic 5+ vs. the 5D Mark II's Digic 4.  It's hard to say.  This is the same exact scenario when the 7D was released, if you had a 50D you probably weren't going to get a 7D b/c the differences weren't enough.  Same with the 5D2 and 6D.  I think this camera is just a 2012 version of the 2008 5D Mark II, simply a 5D2 with a Digic 5+.  The improvements are probably marginal between those two, however, maybe significant from users going to FF for the first time. 
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: infared on September 17, 2012, 10:33:10 AM
I have a nice 5DMkII. I would be stupid to swap it for a 6D. Now if someone starts from scratch I guess it could be a 50/50 decision. Personally, I would still choose between a 5D MkII or 5DMkIII (when the price comes down a little).

I agree here.  I don't think the 6D is for 5D Mark II owners.  I suppose the upgrade for 5D Mark II owners was intended to be the Mark III or maybe some other high MP camera down the road.  The 6D I feel is for those who are entering FF for the first time.  Can you compare which is better?  Well, I don't know, maybe the 6D with a Digic 5+ vs. the 5D Mark II's Digic 4.  It's hard to say.  This is the same exact scenario when the 7D was released, if you had a 50D you probably weren't going to get a 7D b/c the differences weren't enough.  Same with the 5D2 and 6D.  I think this camera is just a 2012 version of the 2008 5D Mark II, simply a 5D2 with a Digic 5+.  The improvements are probably marginal between those two, however, maybe significant from users going to FF for the first time.
I agree with all your comments AND to take this a step further (I am a 5DII owner who wincingly upgraded to a 5DIII)....I think if you upgraded(?) to the 6D from a 7D (hmmm...that somehow is so telling) you would be greatly disappointed in the 6D after being used to an incredible auto focus system, way faster frame rate, etc. The performance would be lacking. Not to mention selling off your lenses and starting from scratch. 
So I think this camera is more for customers who what to get into full frame but are coming from a few notches down in the pecking order or are completely new.
I have to say, after using the autofocus and extended bracketing capabilities (my main reason for shelling out all of that cash!) of the 5DIII, it would be painful to go back to a 5DII or a 6D.  The 5DIII is incredible from my viewpoint, but at a very dear cost to this photographer. I do not care that the 5DIII does not have GPS or Wifi...but for the price it certainly should!!!!! LOL!
From an over view, without comparing all 4 cameras (6D, 7D, 5DII and 5DIII) are all incredible image-making devices. They are all "There-There" for creating great photographs in capable hands.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: seacritter on September 17, 2012, 10:35:21 AM
I have a 5D Mark II.  I bought it a few months ago for $1500 on craigslist.  After owning it for a short time, I now know that I should have made that purchase years ago.  I have a considerable amount of money tied up in "L" lenses.  I've always spent the money on glass first.  That being said...

If I were upgrading from anything less than FF, and could afford it, I'd probably go for the new technology.  The 6D has Digic 5+, built in Wifi, silent shutter mode, GPS and a smartphone app.  That alone would sway me towards the 6D.  Though, imagine the used price market on the Mark II when the 6D hits.  It would be very affordable to pick up a nice used Mark II for backup or whatever.

So, in the end, you can't go wrong with either choice.  I absolutely enjoy my Mark II.  This is a total win-win...

Scott
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: aznable on September 17, 2012, 10:38:32 AM
This is the same exact scenario when the 7D was released, if you had a 50D you probably weren't going to get a 7D b/c the differences weren't enough. 

100% coverage, 3more megapixels, 10 af points more and the rest of AF trhat put the on in 50 is shame, 2 more fps.

quite differente here...it'ìs for new customers
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: thejoyofsobe on September 17, 2012, 10:53:07 AM
yeah this isn't for folks who already own 5D2s.  it's for us schlubs who've never had a full-frame DSLR. it's not a pro-AF but can it really be worse than the 5D2? i doubt it if the -3EV AF is even close to correct. really the biggest disappointment is the lack of articulated screen. i would trade GPS and a touchscreen just for that after finding it so useful on my 60D.

provided it passes the hands-on test, i'll probably give it a year after its release when the retail price goes down well sub-$2000 and then pick up a refurb. maybe it'll be available on the CLP by then as well. that should be a pretty fair price for a FF with Digic 5+
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: 7enderbender on September 17, 2012, 10:59:43 AM
I have a 5D Mark II.  I bought it a few months ago for $1500 on craigslist.  After owning it for a short time, I now know that I should have made that purchase years ago.  I have a considerable amount of money tied up in "L" lenses.  I've always spent the money on glass first.  That being said...

If I were upgrading from anything less than FF, and could afford it, I'd probably go for the new technology.  The 6D has Digic 5+, built in Wifi, silent shutter mode, GPS and a smartphone app.  That alone would sway me towards the 6D.  Though, imagine the used price market on the Mark II when the 6D hits.  It would be very affordable to pick up a nice used Mark II for backup or whatever.

So, in the end, you can't go wrong with either choice.  I absolutely enjoy my Mark II.  This is a total win-win...

Scott


What is your prediction regarding the used-price market for the 5DII? My guess is that if it's discontinued the price will go up and you'll likely pay more for it than the current new price. It all depends of course where the 5DIII price is going and we just saw some positive indicators. The 6D seems too much of a trade off in my opinion to be taken serious by people who had invested in and are used to a 5DII.

If my 5DII broke tomorrow beyond repair I'd be willing to spend up to $2000 for a replacement. I'd be hard pressed to add another 800 bucks for a 5DIII. I would not consider the 6D at all at any price really. 1/4000 max shutter speed, 1/180 sync speed, smaller form factor with more plastic, worse viewfinder are total deal breakers.

Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: brianleighty on September 17, 2012, 12:44:17 PM
First question is when you do need it? If you can wait then obviously do that. If not then you only have one option. Waiting will also give time for reviews and such. If it's anything like the 5d mark iii it'll come down in price a fair amount soon after it's released so if you can afford to wait that would make sense.

Next is what are you shooting? The biggest advantage the 6D will have over the 5d mark ii is most likely in the sensor. If you don't need the higher sensitivity then the things you loose like the shutter speed and build quality might be worth sticking with 5d ii. The other thing that factors in is price. I bought my 5d mark ii brand new for pretty much $1600 after you factor in $800 for the 24-105. For $500 more I don't think it's worth it. However when that price comes down then it becomes more tempting. It looks like it has the same metering system as the 5D iii and the AF should at least be a little better. The other deficiencies aren't a huge deal to me and are things I can work around. The wifi could open up a lot of really cool uses but once again none of this will be known until we have units shipping to reviewers.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: MK5GTI on September 17, 2012, 02:11:00 PM
i would say it comes down to Handling Vs Image Quality.

the 6D with new metering, newer sensor (which doesn't mean much in Canon book), Digi5+, possible useable higher ISO looks like will delivery better IQ than the "older" 5d2.

Handling and specs, the 5D2 still sounds better, namely VF, 1/8000, CF card.

i think whats missing from all the post above is the video capability of the 6D, looking at the spec, looks like its 5D3 territory?
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on September 17, 2012, 03:02:05 PM
i think whats missing from all the post above is the video capability of the 6D, looking at the spec, looks like its 5D3 territory?

No, video looks like 1dc or Nikon territory - uncompressed hdmi, 1080p/60fps ... let's hope Magic Lantern will be able to do something about that.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Half Way To Nothing on September 17, 2012, 03:52:34 PM
I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better? How many 5D Mk II owners would swap their camera for the 6D? Are there any advantages the 5D Mk II holds over the 6D?

If you are in the UK, I was looking at the 5D Mk iii or the 6D. The UK price of the 6D is £1800 (delivery before xmas) and then saw Digital Rev (Hong Kong) have them for £2080, free delivery and they pay the TAX. £280 of my maths seemed like a lot more camera for the money.

5D Mkiii ordered, awaiting delivery!!
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: bbasiaga on September 17, 2012, 04:16:50 PM
Agreed, if you got a MK II, save your money.  If you have no FF, I'd go 6d.  Same AF performance.  Likely better high ISO peformance (need to see real world images to confirm).  Assuming the ISO is there its worth the money over the MKII just for that, plus you'll get wifi built in, a better LCD, etc. 

If you got a MKII already, look for one of those $2800USD Ebay deals on a MKIII...


-Brian
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: iaind on September 17, 2012, 04:23:21 PM
I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better? How many 5D Mk II owners would swap their camera for the 6D? Are there any advantages the 5D Mk II holds over the 6D?

If you are in the UK, I was looking at the 5D Mk iii or the 6D. The UK price of the 6D is £1800 (delivery before xmas) and then saw Digital Rev (Hong Kong) have them for £2080, free delivery and they pay the TAX. £280 of my maths seemed like a lot more camera for the money.

5D Mkiii ordered, awaiting delivery!!
Change from £2050 now
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on September 17, 2012, 04:25:20 PM
Agreed, if you got a MK II, save your money.  If you have no FF, I'd go 6d.  Same AF performance.

Um, you did notice the 6d looses its one cross point af with lenses of f2.8 and faster? That is hardly "same af performance" and unfortunately will be the reason I won't buy a 6d at any price. It kills the 6d as the 5d2 upgrade as "poor man's event/wedding ff" and this is probably what Canon intended to do.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: karen1961 on September 17, 2012, 04:36:15 PM
i have a 450d at the moment,and was getting a 5dii but with the release of the 6d,i just don't know which one to go with :-\
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: funkboy on September 17, 2012, 04:39:27 PM
(apologies for the cross-post)

The 5D c was "the original entry-level full-frame camera"

The 5DII was the upgrade of the original entry-level FF camera, to which they added movie mode almost as an afterthought & turned the cinematography world on its head.

The 5DIII is clearly *not* an entry-level FF camera; it's very much a professional camera that sits in the lineup with cameras like the 1DIV.  It's got professional AF, professional construction & sealing (which is why it doesn't have built-in wi-fi & gps; the signals won't go through the all-metal body (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-6d/3)).  And a professional price...

But the 5DII is still selling like crazy several months after the 5DIII was released, because you can get a brand one now from reputable shops for a little over half the price of a mk3 (http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/02699/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-price.html) (or a guaranteed refurb for ~$200 less than that, putting it comfortably under half the cost of its "replacement").

As noted here the other day, the 5DII just hit four years old.  The supply contracts on some of the components are probably running out soon, which means that some of the parts needed to make it won't be available anymore (or at least not in the prices & volumes that they're used to).  This would require redesigning circuits (& possibly firmware) to use newer components that replace the discontinued ones.  I'm sure Fukushima didn't help the supply contract situation much either.  The end result is that they have a near-obsolete camera (from a manufacturing perspective) that is still selling like crazy, which is not really a situation they've been in before in recent memory.

So they would be braindead not to replace the "just under $2K" full-frame position in their lineup with something in the segment that will continue capitalizing on the demand for an FF camera in this price range. 

And it'll appeal to a wider audience than the 5DII it replaces.  It's smaller, lighter, takes the SD cards that the cameras that a lot of people upgrading to it have, and has better low-light performance & better AF (which is why I'm getting one).

I think it's clear by now that the 6D is *not* in fact a reaction to the D600; if it was they surely would have put at least 7D-grade AF and the LCD viewfinder overlay screen in there.

The 6D is the replacement for the 2012 5DII.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Mt Spokane Photography on September 17, 2012, 04:54:40 PM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

I i didn't had so many Canon glass i had dropped the ship few months ago when 5D3 was announced and go for D800.
I tried the D800.  I even bought some high end Nikon glass to try with it.  The D800 is a very good body, but finding Nikon glass is difficult.  I mainly used the 24-70mm f/2.8G.  It had such bad CA that it could not be corrected.  Then, there is no equivalent for the 135mm L, the 24-105mm L, the 100-400mm L, none of my favorite lenses have anything nearly as good, and the price of the inferior glass is higher.
This takes away most of any high resolution advantage the body gives.
High ISO noise is also a issue, but if you stay at 400 or less, the DR is fabulous.
You might be unhappy trying to match your Canon lenses.  After all, Glass is much more important in the long run.  Nikon lenses have even more AFMA issues, they are glued together, forget any maintenance that you can do yourself, and live view on the D800 is slow and barely usable.  Tethering software is not included, and when it is, its painfully slow.  There are lots of little things that reading the hype does not tell you.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Albi86 on September 17, 2012, 05:14:48 PM
Some Canon lenses are better or even unique, no doubt about it. Especially in the tele segment.
But what about the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G? The 85mm f/1.8G? The 14-24?
Chipped versions of Samyang 14mm and 35mm.
The Voigtländer 40mm f/2 pancake.
Sigma lenses having a more reliable AF.

The trade-off is surely not that bad, though I understand that if you shoot at +300mm Canon still has the lead.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: scotthillphoto on September 17, 2012, 05:28:12 PM
For me its all about the noise performance... I love my 5D3 and looking for that backup body. The 5D2 is tested and true but it seems like the 6D will perform better in low light. Since everything else is about the same that will be my true deciding factor... And at this point one cannot make a true decision over which body to get, till we get some real images to look at.

And really canon ONLY 11 Af points??? at least give me my 7D full frame camera....
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Caps18 on September 17, 2012, 06:01:59 PM
Hi

I have a 5D mk2 and I am definitely not considering getting a 6D. I am sure there will be improvements over the mk 2 but I doubt the improvements would validate an update.

Only body purchase I might consider is the high mp one if it has good DR... I am mainly shooting landscapes, so don't have much of a need for high fps or AF system a la 5D mk3 or 1Dx.

6D is an entry level FF though, I do not think it is aimed at anyone who already has a FF camera...

Cheers!

I agree.

I would get the 6D over the 5Dm2 (I think).  I will need to see more details.  The GPS is a major plus for me with the photos I shoot.  And I hope Canon gets in the habit of adding built-in GPS now.

But, that 45MP, High Dynamic Range camera is still the future...
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: pwp on September 17, 2012, 06:15:09 PM
The 6D is not for 5DII shooters looking for an upgrade. Better to drop that spare $2000 on the new 24-70 f/2.8L.
But for someone wanting an economical pathway out of APS-C, the 6D would be first choice over the excellent but now relatively ancient 5DII. The newer sensor, newer processor, no doubt improved AF array and other new features/incremental improvements etc make the 6D the clear choice.

But for extremely price sensitive photographers looking to move to FF from APS-C, the 6D will absolutely hammer the second hand prices of good, well cared for 5D MkII bodies. Really, we're spoiled for choice.

-PW
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: DigitalDivide on September 17, 2012, 06:39:11 PM
(apologies for the cross-post)

The 5D c was "the original entry-level full-frame camera"

The 5DII was the upgrade of the original entry-level FF camera, to which they added movie mode almost as an afterthought & turned the cinematography world on its head.

The 5DIII is clearly *not* an entry-level FF camera; it's very much a professional camera that sits in the lineup with cameras like the 1DIV.  It's got professional AF, professional construction & sealing (which is why it doesn't have built-in wi-fi & gps; the signals won't go through the all-metal body (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-6d/3)).  And a professional price...

But the 5DII is still selling like crazy several months after the 5DIII was released, because you can get a brand one now from reputable shops for a little over half the price of a mk3 (http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/02699/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-price.html) (or a guaranteed refurb for ~$200 less than that, putting it comfortably under half the cost of its "replacement").

As noted here the other day, the 5DII just hit four years old.  The supply contracts on some of the components are probably running out soon, which means that some of the parts needed to make it won't be available anymore (or at least not in the prices & volumes that they're used to).  This would require redesigning circuits (& possibly firmware) to use newer components that replace the discontinued ones.  I'm sure Fukushima didn't help the supply contract situation much either.  The end result is that they have a near-obsolete camera (from a manufacturing perspective) that is still selling like crazy, which is not really a situation they've been in before in recent memory.

So they would be braindead not to replace the "just under $2K" full-frame position in their lineup with something in the segment that will continue capitalizing on the demand for an FF camera in this price range. 

And it'll appeal to a wider audience than the 5DII it replaces.  It's smaller, lighter, takes the SD cards that the cameras that a lot of people upgrading to it have, and has better low-light performance & better AF (which is why I'm getting one).

I think it's clear by now that the 6D is *not* in fact a reaction to the D600; if it was they surely would have put at least 7D-grade AF and the LCD viewfinder overlay screen in there.

The 6D is the replacement for the 2012 5DII.

I strongly agree with this view.  The 6D seems very much aligned with what the 5DII was when it came out - a class leading landscape and low light camera with great IQ but lacking the FPS and AF required for sports and action.

While it is hard to argue that the original $2700 cost made the 5DII an entry-level camera, it was most likely not possible to build anything FF worth having for much less.  Buyers would have expected semi-pro construction at that price point.  The 6D is much closer to what I would consider an entry-level price, certainly in Japanese Yen, although the weak dollar means it is not as attractive to hobbyists as it might be.  It looks to have been designed specifically to appeal to Rebel users moving up to FF.

The 5DIII by contrast is a great all-round performer, with excellent IQ and AF.  It is an altogether different beast, only lacking some high-end professional features and the bulletproof build quality of the 1DX.

I strongly suspect that Canon's main motivation for designing the 6D is to continue to sell to the 5DII crowd with a camera they can build for a lot less money.  The 5DII was probably not designed with such high volume sales in mind, and in any case advances over the last 4 years may reduce the manufacturing costs significantly.  Pros and serious amateurs now have the 5DIII as an upgrade option, whereas in the past you had to go to a very pricey 1D series if you wanted to move up.  Canon also needed a replacement for a long in the tooth model; add to that the need to cut costs because of the exchange rates and it makes perfect sense.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: meli on September 17, 2012, 07:26:42 PM
so, pwp,
But for someone wanting an economical pathway out of APS-C, the 6D would be first choice over the excellent but now relatively ancient 5DII. The newer sensor, newer processor, no doubt improved AF array and other new features/incremental improvements etc make the 6D the clear choice.

and a couple of days before:
Wow! Eleven focus points. That's progress.  :P
The spec list reads pretty much as beige mush.
I doubt this camera exists.

-PW

so do tell us again, that beige mush is the clear choice?
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: meli on September 17, 2012, 07:35:20 PM
The 6D seems very much aligned with what the 5DII was when it came out - a class leading landscape and low light camera with great IQ but lacking the FPS and AF required for sports and action.

I hereby declare this as the funniest statement i've ever read in these forums. Its stature could only be challenged by a video showing you typing it down with a straight face   ;D
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: unfocused on September 17, 2012, 08:04:51 PM
Funkboy and Digital Divide: You are exactly right (despite the sarcasm of others).

This is the 5DII updated with the current processor (so they can phase out the old processors) and using updated manufacturing processes. I suspect there is also some savings on the sensor as well as I cannot imagine that sensor manufacturing has not become more efficient in the past four years. On almost all features it improves on the 5DII, yet is selling for significantly less at introduction.

A lot of the negative reaction here is due to sticker shock over the cost of the 5DIII. It's not unlike what happened when the 60D came out and 40D users were disappointed that the price of admittance into the top level of APS-C sensor cameras had become the 7D.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Jotho on September 17, 2012, 08:43:26 PM
Funkboy and Digital Divide: You are exactly right (despite the sarcasm of others).

This is the 5DII updated with the current processor (so they can phase out the old processors) and using updated manufacturing processes. I suspect there is also some savings on the sensor as well as I cannot imagine that sensor manufacturing has not become more efficient in the past four years. On almost all features it improves on the 5DII, yet is selling for significantly less at introduction.

A lot of the negative reaction here is due to sticker shock over the cost of the 5DIII. It's not unlike what happened when the 60D came out and 40D users were disappointed that the price of admittance into the top level of APS-C sensor cameras had become the 7D.
As always a sensible and balanced post from you. I would agree on this. A modern version of the 5D2 that fits in their manufacturing processes and that sells a bit cheaper. Not bad at all I think. The market will pass its judgement if it was the correct idea. I would bet on yes.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: pwp on September 17, 2012, 08:46:15 PM
so, pwp,
But for someone wanting an economical pathway out of APS-C, the 6D would be first choice over the excellent but now relatively ancient 5DII. The newer sensor, newer processor, no doubt improved AF array and other new features/incremental improvements etc make the 6D the clear choice.

and a couple of days before:
Wow! Eleven focus points. That's progress.  :P
The spec list reads pretty much as beige mush.
I doubt this camera exists.

-PW

so do tell us again, that beige mush is the clear choice?

Hah! You got me! It's amazing the clarity you gain with more information and a good night's sleep. Yes, the 6D exists.

Even so, each comment was valid at the time. In the context of being a new EOS FF camera, the 6D has a fairly beige, uninspiring feature set. I'm surprised by such a relatively  ho-hum release from Canon.

In the context of direct comparison with the 5D2, the newer 6D would appear to be the preferred choice.

-PW
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: SJTstudios on September 17, 2012, 09:25:55 PM
The 5d ii is a great camera and always will be, but it was the pro big megapixel. The 6d is aimed at enthusiast who don't mind the focusing or fps. For such a long time, it's been "when the new model comes out, I'll get the new one." now canon is saying, "this is for you enthusiasts who want a ff camera," but what will happen when the 3d comes out, will the pros ditch the 5d iii?
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Scott on September 17, 2012, 09:47:28 PM
I have a 5Dii and would be interested in 6D simply for the high ISO performance. I've never really had an issue with the AF of the 5Dii as i manual focus when the going gets tough and from what I've read you can also change the focus screen in the 6D which (correct me if i'm wrong) you can't do with the 5Diii.
There wasn't really enough difference between the 5d ii and the 5diii to justify the price difference but on the other hand the cheaper 6D has the higher ISO performance i so desperately crave + its in a smaller lighter body. IMHO i think it looks like a very nice performer.

So many new and exciting cameras announced this week and so little time/ money to shoot them all..
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Andy_Hodapp on September 17, 2012, 10:41:18 PM

"What is your prediction regarding the used-price market for the 5DII? My guess is that if it's discontinued the price will go up and you'll likely pay more for it than the current new price."


When was the last time a digital camera went up in price because it was discontinued, it's not a collectable, it will go down in price.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: krjc on September 17, 2012, 10:55:15 PM
Easy decision, 6D all the way. For you guys who have a 5DII you wanted to sell, the price just went down by a few hundred easy. :-[
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Philco on September 18, 2012, 03:13:43 AM
Since the 6D is post-600EX-RT, I assume there would be some advantage to having a 6D over a 5DII for HSS off-camera, though I know some people are not feeling limited by the 5DII in that regard. The only other possible advantage I can think of is that if the sensor + digic V more closely matches the color and noise of the 5DIII, it could be a capable back-up camera for me...but I'll still buy another 5DIII.

 If I was a hobbyist primarily into portraits, I'd be thinking the 6D+85L combination looks pretty good at $4,100 versus $3,900 for a 5DIII + 85 f1.8. For the photographer that wants to go FF, but have money left over for glass, I imagine the 6D will be a nice option once the 5DII is nola. For that matter, you could buy two expensive 600EX-RT's to go with a 6D and still come out less than a 5DIII....not ahead, just less.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on September 18, 2012, 03:50:32 AM
Since the 6D is post-600EX-RT, I assume there would be some advantage to having a 6D over a 5DII for HSS off-camera, though I know some people are not feeling limited by the 5DII in that regard.

While Canon says otherwise, it has been confirmed by multiple users that hss & x-sync works just fine with 600rt + 5d2. You won't get the in-camera menus and the new option flash groups, though.

The real advantage would have been if the 6d had a rf-controller next to gps/wifi - would certainly have been possible since it's not full metal.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: charliewphotos on September 18, 2012, 04:38:56 AM

"What is your prediction regarding the used-price market for the 5DII? My guess is that if it's discontinued the price will go up and you'll likely pay more for it than the current new price."


When was the last time a digital camera went up in price because it was discontinued, it's not a collectable, it will go down in price.

Not sure about bodies but the used price of the 24-70mm mk i seems to have risen since the release of the mk ii...
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on September 18, 2012, 05:08:14 AM
When was the last time a digital camera went up in price because it was discontinued, it's not a collectable, it will go down in price.
Not sure about bodies but the used price of the 24-70mm mk i seems to have risen since the release of the mk ii...

If the 6d af is at least "acceptable" and the 5d3 price continues to sink, I don't think the 5d2 will rise in price - though it might stick where it is now. The price 24-70 mk1 is ridiculously high atm, but imho that's just because the mk2 is not on the shelves in numbers and the used mk1 market is thinned by the long mk2 delay.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: bbasiaga on September 18, 2012, 11:08:47 AM
When was the last time a digital camera went up in price because it was discontinued, it's not a collectable, it will go down in price.
Not sure about bodies but the used price of the 24-70mm mk i seems to have risen since the release of the mk ii...

If the 6d af is at least "acceptable" and the 5d3 price continues to sink, I don't think the 5d2 will rise in price - though it might stick where it is now. The price 24-70 mk1 is ridiculously high atm, but imho that's just because the mk2 is not on the shelves in numbers and the used mk1 market is thinned by the long mk2 delay.

Lenses are a bit of a different beast too.  Since they remain relevant and useful regardless of the new technology put into the bodies.  Lenses are an investment, or at least as close as you can get to one in the technological product world.  I do think the used prices will fall though.  As stated - the old ones are discontinued and the new ones are just now out many months later. 

-Brian
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: sovietdoc on September 18, 2012, 02:04:00 PM
6D or 5D II?  Get a D600 and never look back.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: charliewphotos on September 19, 2012, 05:27:57 AM
When was the last time a digital camera went up in price because it was discontinued, it's not a collectable, it will go down in price.
Not sure about bodies but the used price of the 24-70mm mk i seems to have risen since the release of the mk ii...

If the 6d af is at least "acceptable" and the 5d3 price continues to sink, I don't think the 5d2 will rise in price - though it might stick where it is now. The price 24-70 mk1 is ridiculously high atm, but imho that's just because the mk2 is not on the shelves in numbers and the used mk1 market is thinned by the long mk2 delay.

Lenses are a bit of a different beast too.  Since they remain relevant and useful regardless of the new technology put into the bodies.  Lenses are an investment, or at least as close as you can get to one in the technological product world.  I do think the used prices will fall though.  As stated - the old ones are discontinued and the new ones are just now out many months later. 

-Brian

A very solid point well made sir! (just bitter about the 24-70 mki slowly rising as it's possibly my next lens purchase once I go fulll frame!)  ;)
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: brianleighty on September 20, 2012, 11:39:30 AM
Since the 6D is post-600EX-RT, I assume there would be some advantage to having a 6D over a 5DII for HSS off-camera, though I know some people are not feeling limited by the 5DII in that regard.

While Canon says otherwise, it has been confirmed by multiple users that hss & x-sync works just fine with 600rt + 5d2. You won't get the in-camera menus and the new option flash groups, though.

The real advantage would have been if the 6d had a rf-controller next to gps/wifi - would certainly have been possible since it's not full metal.

People are already pissed they put in the wifi and GPS since they didn't put it in the other bodies. If they'd done that then it would of been even worse complaining. Also, I think I read the range on the wifi is only 50m vs 150m external. So it might not provide as much range as an external option.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Albi86 on September 20, 2012, 11:42:23 AM

People are already pissed they put in the wifi and GPS since they didn't put it in the other bodies. If they'd done that then it would of been even worse complaining. Also, I think I read the range on the wifi is only 50m vs 150m external. So it might not provide as much range as an external option.

Hard to blame them. It was the same thing happened to fresh 5D2 users when a few months later the 7D came out with a brand new, finally performing AF.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Ryan_W on September 20, 2012, 12:36:42 PM
Since the 6D is post-600EX-RT, I assume there would be some advantage to having a 6D over a 5DII for HSS off-camera, though I know some people are not feeling limited by the 5DII in that regard.

While Canon says otherwise, it has been confirmed by multiple users that hss & x-sync works just fine with 600rt + 5d2. You won't get the in-camera menus and the new option flash groups, though.

The real advantage would have been if the 6d had a rf-controller next to gps/wifi - would certainly have been possible since it's not full metal.

People are already pissed they put in the wifi and GPS since they didn't put it in the other bodies. If they'd done that then it would of been even worse complaining. Also, I think I read the range on the wifi is only 50m vs 150m external. So it might not provide as much range as an external option.

Actually, I thought I read it was more like 30m - but that's typical of small consumer electronics. You'll be hard pressed to do a real-world test with Bluetooth or WiFi outside of 30 meters (about 100 feet). Keep in mind that they only post what can be solidly achieved with no hope of failure in these tests. Usually when a manufacturer announces these kinds of range specs, most users can experience even double the performance. It will all come down to the particular scenario, i.e. indoors, outdoors, signal interference, strength of broadcast, movement of user, other environmental factors...

Also there's a hands-on example of the AF system available on the Fred Miranda forums that I'm going to post on a separate thread. It looks like the center point of the 6D is next to revolutionary, and the outer points outperform the 5D2 with ease (also, they're not assist points like the 5D2).
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: cliffwang on September 20, 2012, 12:48:46 PM
For who is making decision for 6D or 5D2.  You may consider this 5D2 deal.

http://slickdeals.net/f/5222588-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-21-1MP-DSLR-body-with-PIXMA-Pro-9000-Mark-II-Photo-Printer-Brand-New-Authorized-Canon-USA-Dealer-1-599-00-After-Rebate-Free-Shipping-eBay-daily-Deals (http://slickdeals.net/f/5222588-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-II-21-1MP-DSLR-body-with-PIXMA-Pro-9000-Mark-II-Photo-Printer-Brand-New-Authorized-Canon-USA-Dealer-1-599-00-After-Rebate-Free-Shipping-eBay-daily-Deals)

1599 for 5D2 plus Pro 9000 MK2 is really good.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Ryan_W on September 20, 2012, 12:59:40 PM
I mean, in the end, is the $400-$500 worth dealing with the 5D's AF system and losing like... I can't even count how many stops of sensitivity at the center point, and ISO levels.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: joshmurrah on September 20, 2012, 01:38:48 PM
I'm surprised to see such a large percentage of people, vote for the 6D over the now-discounted 5DII.

I'm a APS-C shooter looking to move to FF... after seeing the shape of things, I snapped up a $2600 5D2 kit from amazon, to replace my 7D and 17-55.  I figure that means I paid $1700 or so for the 5D2 itself.

The biggest things that I didn't like were the only-marginal improvements in AF, the need to make part of the body plastic for the wifi/GPS, making it less dust/weatherproof, and the slower, laggier, less durable shutter. 

As a bonus, my 7D used CF, so I don't need to re-buy memory cards.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Canon-F1 on September 20, 2012, 01:45:51 PM
nobody can make a informed decision yet based on IQ or AF.
because nobody here knows how good or bad the 6D performs.

if you miss a feature the 5D MK2 has and the 6D not ... ok....  question is how important is it for you?

the bigger competition is the D600.

if i had to buy the 5D MK2 or the 6D im not sure i would buy the 5D MK2.
the 6D´s AF is sure better, IQ maybe, GPS, WIFI... and the resell price will be higher.


still i think the 6D is kind of "meh" for a new camera....
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: RichM on September 20, 2012, 03:48:24 PM
I'd probably buy (after reading reviews) the 6D, but won't be selling my 5D2 to get one.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Ryan_W on September 20, 2012, 03:55:16 PM
still i think the 6D is kind of "meh" for a new camera....

This might seem off topic, but it makes me think of Nintendo a bit. There you have another Japanese manufacturer of consumer electronics that got caught in a war of tech escalation with increasingly tight production cycles and plateauing performance, and decided to focus on the customer experience instead of adding +1 to every competitor's specs.

Maybe Canon is taking that same strategy - They're clearly ignoring the D600. I'm sure it would have been nothing to match on the number of AF points, but they chose instead to trounce them on low light performance and accuracy (if early reports are to be believed). They might be ignoring the arms race of more, bigger, faster, and instead are trying to craft products that will create a better experience for a target market. 

I mean, honestly, who is to say what's down the road? Ten years ago, the entire market was driven exclusively by sensor megapixel counts. Today that stat is virtually meaningless for the majority of consumers, and even professionals won't split hairs over a 5 megapixel difference between sensors. In another decade, the entire Internet could be organized by geotags, and then what? You might look back on the 6D as little camera that saw it all coming.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: K-amps on September 20, 2012, 04:03:21 PM
A hidden jewel might be present in the built-in Wi-Fi with Android/iOS remote shooting functionality. I believe that people who love to shoot technically challenging scenes, timelapse and macro photography may find the 6D more than adequate - they rarely use AF anyway.

+1 if you are not going the D600 route.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: K-amps on September 20, 2012, 04:05:52 PM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

I i didn't had so many Canon glass i had dropped the ship few months ago when 5D3 was announced and go for D800.
So Ricku, can you please elaborate on that? What makes you draw to that conclusion? Specs only?

Nicku, next thing for you now is to abandon this forum and go to the Nikon forum instead then.

Really??  now we have this hate filled fanboi telling us where to shop? Ricku/Nicku: Your opinions are very much appreciated to the rest of us; please continute to provide a sense of balance on the forum.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Trovador on September 20, 2012, 04:42:47 PM
Whatever, I'm getting a 6D for my collection of sexay white lenses!.  Woot!  For everything else there's the 7D.

(pending IQ/AF tests of course  ;) )

Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: K-amps on September 20, 2012, 04:47:20 PM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

I i didn't had so many Canon glass i had dropped the ship few months ago when 5D3 was announced and go for D800.
I tried the D800.  I even bought some high end Nikon glass to try with it.  The D800 is a very good body, but finding Nikon glass is difficult.  I mainly used the 24-70mm f/2.8G.  It had such bad CA that it could not be corrected.  Then, there is no equivalent for the 135mm L, the 24-105mm L, the 100-400mm L, none of my favorite lenses have anything nearly as good, and the price of the inferior glass is higher.
This takes away most of any high resolution advantage the body gives.
High ISO noise is also a issue, but if you stay at 400 or less, the DR is fabulous.
You might be unhappy trying to match your Canon lenses.  After all, Glass is much more important in the long run.  Nikon lenses have even more AFMA issues, they are glued together, forget any maintenance that you can do yourself, and live view on the D800 is slow and barely usable.  Tethering software is not included, and when it is, its painfully slow.  There are lots of little things that reading the hype does not tell you.

+1  Good to hear this viewpoint as well !  :-*
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: mws on September 20, 2012, 05:22:00 PM
I was saving my money for a 5Diii, when the 6D was announced I considered it, but just yesterday I bought a barley used 5dii for 1,400.

I'm sure the 6D's wi-fi and GPS are nice, I just don't see myself actually using it. The 5diii is very expensive, but is worth every penny, as much as I would like the better AF system it's just not worth the extra price for a casual shooter such as myself. Also seeing that the 5diii sensor is only a small improvement over the 5dii, this pushed me into the 5dii purchase.

Even though value is a subjective term, I think the 6D, 5dii, and 5dii are all decent values. If you can find a lightly used 5dii for a reasonable price I would go for that, put the money you save into glass.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Jotho on September 20, 2012, 06:28:48 PM
Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

I i didn't had so many Canon glass i had dropped the ship few months ago when 5D3 was announced and go for D800.
So Ricku, can you please elaborate on that? What makes you draw to that conclusion? Specs only?

Nicku, next thing for you now is to abandon this forum and go to the Nikon forum instead then.

Really??  now we have this hate filled fanboi telling us where to shop? Ricku/Nicku: Your opinions are very much appreciated to the rest of us; please continute to provide a sense of balance on the


Didn't see that coming. I have to admit. Hate filled and fanboy to describe me. Well I guess one will never stop being surprisedeven at my age. Hate filled and aggressive is what I would like to use to describe comments like yours. I simply asked one of them to provide an explanation to his views and tried to point out that this is not Canonbashing.com. Comments like theirs about a products they've never seen and most definitely are not the target market for, comes off as quite childish. I think criticism is good and can be constructive when used properly and I hope to see more of it. To this point reading this forum has helped me alot in developing as a photographer and also making decisions on what gear to buy. I am sure, had I once chosen to go the Nikon path, I would have been equally happy. But I didn't and in my view nothing has happened that made me regret my choice.

I even picked up the 5D3 that I am sure you and your buddies also think is a poor product. Well I've learned to use it quite well now and every time I download images from the camera to the pc I'm stunned.

With hopes of a mature and sensible debate on this fine forum.

Jotho

Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: stevenprebble on September 21, 2012, 03:35:05 AM
I won't be upgrading to either due to too many cons but the 6d would be better for me as it shoots at 60/50fps which I need for my work.
If the 5dmkII had that small feature then that alone would be enough for me to upgrade.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: M.ST on September 21, 2012, 05:57:57 AM
If you want a perfect body quality and you have a lot of CF cards get the 5D Mark II. Speed and AF is not all if you only use the camera for landscapes, stills and portraits.

No other camera until today can beat the 5D Mark II in this price class.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Superka on September 21, 2012, 07:59:36 AM
If you think about Nikon D600 you should wait for nice review first. All Nikons, except D800 has poor Auto ISO  function, which ignore current focal lenght. Nikon D600 can have good from D800 or poor as any other Nikon's.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: canon20d7d on September 21, 2012, 09:17:11 AM
i'd side more towards the 6d since its supposed to have a better auto focus system and a new digic 5 processor. but i still think the 5d2 is a great value for a FF camera
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: bdunbar79 on September 21, 2012, 09:24:50 AM
If I were to choose TODAY, I would likely go with the 6D.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on September 21, 2012, 02:11:52 PM
If I were to choose TODAY, I would likely go with the 6D.

... and then wait until December ... and then some, think of the 24-70ii and 1dx. Did Canon actually mention *which* December the 6d will be shipped in volume numbers :-p ?
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: bdunbar79 on September 21, 2012, 02:15:48 PM
If I were to choose TODAY, I would likely go with the 6D.

... and then wait until December ... and then some, think of the 24-70ii and 1dx. Did Canon actually mention *which* December the 6d will be shipped in volume numbers :-p ?

Haha!
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: erwinrm on September 21, 2012, 02:45:36 PM
If I were to choose TODAY, I would likely go with the 6D.

... and then wait until December ... and then some, think of the 24-70ii and 1dx. Did Canon actually mention *which* December the 6d will be shipped in volume numbers :-p ?

 ;D thanks for the laugh!  let's try to remember the 6D is just vaporware for us unwashed masses at the moment.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: K-amps on September 21, 2012, 03:02:49 PM
If I were to choose TODAY, I would likely go with the 6D.

... and then wait until December ... and then some, think of the 24-70ii and 1dx. Did Canon actually mention *which* December the 6d will be shipped in volume numbers :-p ?

Hey man... can't bash Canon on that, after all they did have all the floods in Thailand... that must have affected their RM suppliy lines.... Oh never mind, that was Nikon who is delivering the 6D upon announcement.  ;)
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: cszy67 on September 21, 2012, 11:41:29 PM
I guess I am stuck waiting for the 5D Mk IV since Canon did not include GPS with the unit. Seriously, we are in 2012 and GPS in a camera is treated as something special???

And I will not even begin to consider the 6D since it is an even number - I only like even numbers for my TV volume setting, number of plates, cups, etc.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: mb66energy on September 22, 2012, 02:21:00 AM
Spec lists and real performance are different things. If Canon has improved AF capabilities of a single line AF point to make it better than recent cross point structures - the specs which count and describe the number or type of AF points are non-information for real performance.
Reasoning about sensor quality without having seen a representative number of images made with this sensor and its processor is wasting time. We have to wait.

A second point is usability: Is GPS worth it? Is WiFi worth it? Clear answer: It depends on the users requirements. For me the chance to have the live view image on my smart phone is a better alternative than a flip screen mirror. If the live view is fast enough and the corresponding app is ergonimically designed.

At the moment I couldn't decide - and there is no need for me to decide. Let's wait for the full spectrum of lab and real world tests - than we will have a basis for decisions.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on September 22, 2012, 03:46:23 AM
Spec lists and real performance are different things. If Canon has improved AF capabilities of a single line AF point to make it better than recent cross point structures - the specs which count and describe the number or type of AF points are non-information for real performance.

If I'd be a Canon seller, I'd also say the specs mean nothing :-) ... but I've shot with a non-cross sensor for years (eos rt, eos 620), and no low light capability can fix the degraded pattern detection, try focusing venetian blinds or a fence with vertical bars. The 6d will be no bad camera and the af system is most likely better than the 5d2, but except for the center point sensor that doesn't mean much.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Area256 on October 22, 2012, 12:57:55 PM
I played with the 6D prototype at Exposure in Toronto recently.  Personally I found the ergonomics far nicer than those of the 5D Mk II - and well tuned for one handed operation.  The 5D Mk II is a bit like holding a brick if you have small hands..  The only draw backs I see are the 1/4000 shutter and the 1/180 sync.  However lets be realistic, the difference between 1/200 and 1/180 sync isn't going to mean much (1/6 of a stop).  And I find when I need 1/8000 I normally also need an ND filter anyway, which brings me down to 1/500 or something like that.

The shutter life difference could be an issue, but then you have to ask how many photos do you actually shoot?  And how long do you plan to keep the camera before replacing it?

However for me the huge selling point of the 6D is the "silent" shutter!  Assuming it works on the production cameras like it does on the prototype - wow is it quiet compared to the 5D Mk II!  It I can think of so many places (events, street, ect.) it would be great to have that feature.

The extra ISO performance, and -3 EV auto-focus are also really important to me (if they work of course).

Other things to consider. The 600EX-RT flashes can only do high-speed wireless sync with newer cameras.  Of course you can do this with pocket wizards flex things, but I think that's the more expensive option now.

And the 6D is a bit snapper to play back, and zoom images.  Don't know if that matters or not.

It's arguable which actually has the better build quality and weather sealing.  Have to wait for someone to take apart a 6D to know for sure.

Overall I'm waiting for the 6D.  However if I owned a 5D Mk II, I'm not sure it's actually worth the upgrade, more likely I would sell it, and try to get a 5D Mk III on-sale instead - which is a clear upgrade in every possible way.

If I was shooting mostly at ISO 100-3200, didn't need the quiet shutter, and could live with manual focus when the auto-focus gave out in the dark, and didn't plan to get 600EX-RTs, I'd go for the 5D Mk II for the price and live with the less ideal ergonomics.

As for the WiFi and GPS.  Well, you can use newer Android phones with a USB cable to control the camera, so WiFi for remote release isn't something I'd miss with the 5D Mk II.  And if I wanted to Geotag images, I'd just get one of the many GPS tracker apps for my phone, and sync with LightRoom and time stamps.  Yes having them is convenient, but it's not a deal breaker/maker in either direction.  If I had the money I'd get the 5D Mk III without a question and forget about the WiFi and GPS.

And if the option of switching brands isn't too painful, look at the D600.  I did, and liked it for the most part.  However the live-view implementation in manual mode is painful to say the least, so I'm sicking with Canon for now.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: RLPhoto on October 22, 2012, 01:00:06 PM
I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better? How many 5D Mk II owners would swap their camera for the 6D? Are there any advantages the 5D Mk II holds over the 6D?

The 6D is a fail for me, because it went to the strange ergos of the 60D.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Bosman on October 22, 2012, 01:41:47 PM
A couple things when looking at the 6d specs:
* 1 cross focus point in the center only
* Shutter speed only up to 1/4000th may be a problem for fast prime work or large apertures in general. I would not like to have to put a fast prime lens on another body just to shoot large apertures...
* Flash sync is 1/180th which may or may not be an issue for some.
* They do specifically mention the camera focusses at -3EV, there is no mention like that for the 5dm3 that i could find but that may just be marketing hype to make it appear to stand out.
* Canon Does mention a "silent shooting mode". I don't yet know how that compares to the 5DM3
Finally canon has made a camera UHS-1 speed capable not just compatible.
* If the info is correct the images should look the same as the 5dm3 as far as iso and digic processing but given the sensor is different they will find a way to make it be dumbed down. In the early days of Canon FF the photo diode sites being much larger than the APS-c's meant more light gathering and thus cleaner better images which i think still applies given the 1dx is 16mp. Potentially if no scimping went into the sensor the 6D's images could be cleaner than the 5dm3, but that most likely will not happen. :D
It is funny to me the nick nacks they add to the camera. One i like is iphone remote app capability. Why in God's name didn't the 5dm3 get this feature???
* The Gps, i could care less. Some may think its cool to have no doubt. People who travel may find this feature being in camera enough reason to purchase this camera, which i guess i could see myself in that position had i traveled the world like some do.
* One thing i am happy to see is that it has the lock on the shooting style dial like the 5dm3.
* Although i prefer the Cf cards over sd by a mile they aren't so bad. If you are a wedding photographer the 6d would be your second body.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: tron on October 22, 2012, 01:43:39 PM
However if I owned a 5D Mk II, I'm not sure it's actually worth the upgrade, more likely I would sell it, and try to get a 5D Mk III on-sale instead - which is a clear upgrade in every possible way.
Exactly! That's why it is a failure to the 5DMkII owners at least  ;)
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: tron on October 22, 2012, 01:48:52 PM
I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better? How many 5D Mk II owners would swap their camera for the 6D? Are there any advantages the 5D Mk II holds over the 6D?

The 6D is a fail for me, because it went to the strange ergos of the 60D.
+1 Plus the use of SD card. It makes it look like a Rebel update. As if we would throw away expensive compact flash cards...
I do not want to be repetitive, many members mentioned other 6D disadvantages.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on October 22, 2012, 01:54:48 PM
On almost all features it improves on the 5DII, yet is selling for significantly less at introduction.

.. except for some core features like only 1/4000 shutter and 1/180 x-sync that is, esp. the latter being a potential problem because even the 1/200s of the 5d2/5d3 is pretty low. And it only has 100k est. shutter cycles, that's 1/3rd less of the 5d2.

My biggest grief with the 6d is that if they wanted it to be different from the 5d3, why not really make it a ff 60d/650d and add all consumer features like swivel screen (yes-this-is-extremely-useful) and touchscreen interface? And a build-in flash is a must-have for a travel body (Nikon manages to put this on ff), I find it ridiculous to have to mount a bulky rf controller or a 580ex-type flash just to control another external flash.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: ishdakuteb on October 22, 2012, 03:14:02 PM
if brand new 5d ii is more than $1500, then i would take 6d.  otherwise, i am going to take 5d ii :)
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: atosk930 on October 22, 2012, 04:12:03 PM
I was extremely excited when the 5d3 was released.  I'm excited to see what the 6d is able to do and if I can save some cash and invest it in something else.  I personally wouldn't purchase the 5d2 unless it was an exceptional deal.  I'd rather make the investment in newer tech.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: broseph on October 23, 2012, 06:39:26 PM
6D if you are on a budget. 5dMk3 If you can afford it.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: iaind on October 25, 2012, 03:31:07 PM
I tried the 6D yesterday. Feels more like a 650D in size. Given price comparisons (inc grey imports) only go for the 6D if you cant afford a 5D3. 
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Timothy_Bruce on October 25, 2012, 03:47:08 PM

* They do specifically mention the camera focusses at -3EV, there is no mention like that for the 5dm3 that i could find but that may just be marketing hype to make it appear to stand out.


Last week an Canon-employee told and showed me  on charts that the 5D3 and 1DX are rated for -2EV so double the light.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: tron on October 25, 2012, 06:40:36 PM

* They do specifically mention the camera focusses at -3EV, there is no mention like that for the 5dm3 that i could find but that may just be marketing hype to make it appear to stand out.


Last week an Canon-employee told and showed me  on charts that the 5D3 and 1DX are rated for -2EV so double the light.
I still prefer my 5Ds (II and III) Thank you.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: xps on October 26, 2012, 06:35:57 AM
I was told by an optican that the aim of Canon was to fast create an Camera as an competitor to the D600. The D600 was better than thought, so they hurried up. The AF System at low light should have been an outstanding new feature, but Canon could manage  this system only with a few AF fields. But this feature will get better in the next years with some new innovations.

I personally think, that this colud be true. The person is an specialist for lenses.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: EOBeav on October 26, 2012, 06:37:43 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again. With the 6D, it looks like they've successfully Rebelized the xD line.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: krjc on October 26, 2012, 08:25:01 PM
6D is the perfect watch for the gf or bf of a photographer. Also as a backup if necessary.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: djurma11 on October 27, 2012, 11:43:48 AM
With the current prices of the 5D2, it's a no brainer! You can get the body + 24-105 for the price of the 6D. (see BH bundle with pixma 9000 and $400 rebate).
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: tron on October 27, 2012, 01:39:57 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again. With the 6D, it looks like they've successfully Rebelized the xD line.
Except they have multiplied the price  ;D
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Ryan_W on October 27, 2012, 02:29:04 PM
However for me the huge selling point of the 6D is the "silent" shutter!  Assuming it works on the production cameras like it does on the prototype - wow is it quiet compared to the 5D Mk II!  It I can think of so many places (events, street, ect.) it would be great to have that feature.

^^^ This.

The 6D isn't a 5dMkIII and it's not a 7D, and the three cameras aren't intended for the same audience or the same purpose. The 6D is a street/travel shooter through and through - designed for less weight, integrated GPS that will only work outdoors, better one-hand operation, SD cards (more universal compatibility) and a built in App for remote uploading to social media.

The GPS bashing is all good and well if you're photographing your cousin's birthday party or a baseball game once a week, but as someone shooting freelance editorial on the street with 1,000 frames per set, I appreciate the extra level of metadata allowing me to sort. It'll also make the camera fully compatible with social media mapping features that pull from similar data on smartphones to automatically tag locations.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: tron on October 27, 2012, 08:04:48 PM
The GPS bashing is all good and well if you're photographing your cousin's birthday party or a baseball game once a week, but as someone shooting freelance editorial on the street with 1,000 frames per set, I appreciate the extra level of metadata allowing me to sort. It'll also make the camera fully compatible with social media mapping features that pull from similar data on smartphones to automatically tag locations.
1000 frames per set cries professional. Now I do not mean to insult anyone but social media cries snapshots taken by kids. And snapshots can be taken by a lesser camera. Sorry! Can't take them too seriously. Just my opinion.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: DB on October 27, 2012, 08:52:19 PM
I've posted this video on CR before, it is an interview with Richard Shepherd, Senior Product Specialist at Canon Europe Ltd., and he expressly states in ENGLISH that 6D is an upgrade for xxxD & 60D owners who want to go FF.

So please stop saying things like: "the 6D is a 5D2 failure" or "6D is not intended for the same audience as 7D or 5D3 users"...WE ALREADY KNOW THIS....CANON TOLD US THIS IN SEPTEMBER

I do not wish to be rude but reading these remarks is like listening to someone say "imho 2+2 = 4", so please stop second-guessing what is already an acknowledged fact by the manufacturer of this product.

Canon EOS 6D preview interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xez3iLe_eko#ws)
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Area256 on October 27, 2012, 09:37:29 PM
The GPS bashing is all good and well if you're photographing your cousin's birthday party or a baseball game once a week, but as someone shooting freelance editorial on the street with 1,000 frames per set, I appreciate the extra level of metadata allowing me to sort. It'll also make the camera fully compatible with social media mapping features that pull from similar data on smartphones to automatically tag locations.
1000 frames per set cries professional. Now I do not mean to insult anyone but social media cries snapshots taken by kids. And snapshots can be taken by a lesser camera. Sorry! Can't take them too seriously. Just my opinion.

Social media is becoming very important to both media outlets and professional photographers in many fields of work (take weddings for example).  We may not like the vast majority of work posted on social media, but many news papers and TV stations are being forced on to stay competitive, as are wedding photographers to network for clients.  Just because the majority of stuff on social media is really bad, doesn't mean there aren't pros who use it as a important part of doing business.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: aalbert on October 28, 2012, 12:04:07 AM
Just noticed a new hands-on for the 6D.  They take a lot of time going through the smartphone app, and flesh out / reinforce other first reviews from other sites.

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2012/10/27/first-impressions-canon-6d-and-wi-fi-demo/ (http://www.thephoblographer.com/2012/10/27/first-impressions-canon-6d-and-wi-fi-demo/)

Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Vikmnilu on October 28, 2012, 04:59:37 AM
Well, exclusively focusing in the actual question of the thread :)
I would recommend the 5D mark II, bought it used in April and can't be more happy about it. It was such an improvement compared to my old 10D that I used for 7 seven years. I even asked myself why I did not buy before.

Reading about the 6D it seems that truly is a first FF for those who have had  APS-C and want to upgrade.
The fact that it has a slot only for micro SD and not compact flash makes me dislike it.
Wireless and so on is a great add on, but imo not strictly necessary nowdays.

5D mark II is still a marvellous camera.

The only reason I would buy a 6D isthe possible (???) better ISO performance.

Choose right and enjoy the shooting!

Victor
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: robbinzo on October 28, 2012, 06:13:06 AM
The Nikon D600 AF isn't all that great in the real world (when compared to the 5D III and D800 it pretty much sucks). I would like a really good AF system now I get too many out of focus action shots with my rebel 550D.
I'm waiting for the 5D III to come down in price in the New Year. I may buy one from DigitalRev and save about 20%.
The 6D was a good piece of marketing for the 5D III for me because it made me realize that an entry level FF just doesn't have the features that I would like.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: bycostello on October 31, 2012, 04:51:50 AM
i travel a lot so the 6d being lighter and the gps has appeal...  if i could do a direct swap i would...
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: M.ST on October 31, 2012, 07:17:13 AM
If you have a lot of expensive CF cards, want C1toC3 instead of C1toC2, a well build camera body and don´t want the touch display get the 5D Mark II.

A lot of professional photographers use the 5D Mark II and 1Ds Mark III and are not willing to get a 6D or 5D Mark III. They wait for a camera with higher resolution and better image quality,  buy the D800E  or swap to the medium format cameras.






Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on October 31, 2012, 08:13:04 AM
I do not wish to be rude but reading these remarks is like listening to someone say "imho 2+2 = 4", so please stop second-guessing what is already an acknowledged fact by the manufacturer of this product.

You should run an antivirus program, you've been infected by Canon marketing ... the one and only comparison basis is the price you get a product for (or at least the price you'd expect it to drop to in the next time), anything else is just a nice marketing wrapper.

i travel a lot so the 6d being lighter and the gps has appeal...

The question still is how power-efficient the gps will be because the solution inside a camera might need more juice like a $40 external tagger that runs 24h+ on one battery load. And I'd be surprised if the 6d will be as precise as dedicated taggers, esp. inside or in semi-shielded areas (houses, trees, ...).
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Ryan_W on October 31, 2012, 10:15:53 PM
The question still is how power-efficient the gps will be because the solution inside a camera might need more juice like a $40 external tagger that runs 24h+ on one battery load. And I'd be surprised if the 6d will be as precise as dedicated taggers, esp. inside or in semi-shielded areas (houses, trees, ...).

Are there commercially available GPS applications that can connect while the user is indoors?
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: bycostello on October 31, 2012, 11:08:10 PM
I do not wish to be rude but reading these remarks is like listening to someone say "imho 2+2 = 4", so please stop second-guessing what is already an acknowledged fact by the manufacturer of this product.

You should run an antivirus program, you've been infected by Canon marketing ... the one and only comparison basis is the price you get a product for (or at least the price you'd expect it to drop to in the next time), anything else is just a nice marketing wrapper.

i travel a lot so the 6d being lighter and the gps has appeal...

The question still is how power-efficient the gps will be because the solution inside a camera might need more juice like a $40 external tagger that runs 24h+ on one battery load. And I'd be surprised if the 6d will be as precise as dedicated taggers, esp. inside or in semi-shielded areas (houses, trees, ...).

I caryy a spare battery anyway.. so not a big issue...  usually a power point somewhere for my univesal travel adapter to plug into
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: ThomasT on March 02, 2013, 11:01:16 PM
Go to Ken Rockwell's site for definitve info on all these. I will get the 6D based on his input, my first digital after a long velvia/zeiss marriage. Ken  was in the industry developing hardware and software for color digital, and now is a full time reviewer. If its not good enough, he tells us, if its superior, you get to know.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Andy_Hodapp on March 03, 2013, 12:03:56 AM
Go to Ken Rockwell's site for definitve info on all these. I will get the 6D based on his input, my first digital after a long velvia/zeiss marriage. Ken  was in the industry developing hardware and software for color digital, and now is a full time reviewer. If its not good enough, he tells us, if its superior, you get to know.

I really hope you are trolling or kidding.
Title: Re: 6D or 5D Mk II
Post by: Marsu42 on March 03, 2013, 03:56:47 AM
If its not good enough, he tells us, if its superior, you get to know.
I really hope you are trolling or kidding.

KR certainly has the ability - for good or worse - to convey his personal mid-range amateur preferences as a definite opinion, and for people (re)entering the dslr market imho that's at least better advice than the usual "just get expensive gear, you'll get sparkling(tm) shots" often found in stores.

Btw what the poster above wrote is also KR's business concept - "help me help you" and make things (apparently) simpler - so no need to attack people who (currently) like KR.