Hi, thanks for your review and comments.
I think that internet camera specs cause many to look at camera and figures and judge purely on those numbers. In my opinion, it's how a camera performs is more important. A good camera is more than the sum of it's parts. For years I have used a 5DII to good effect, using the single point and recompose method and eg-s view screen. Who needs 61 points when a really good central point and a bit of honed skill work great.
When I looked over the 6D's specs I thought to myself that many photographers will dismiss this fab camera purely on paper specs, which is a pity because I think that often a "back to basics" approach can re-awaken one's photography. A good photo always takes a bit of effort, having a machine which causes one to work at a photo I think is a good thing and helps one to pick their shots and not the all too often seen "pray and spray" approach of the modern generation.
This camera appeals for it's small size, price point and unencumbered features list. I hear what the reviewer says about lens balance with f2.8 zooms. Might I suggest the new 24-70 f4 L IS and 70-200 f4 L IS would be a better suit? Or even the fantastic (and sorely misunderstood) 70-300 L IS.
I specify that this is not a personal attack to the author I quoted, and that I'm quite sure the 6D is capable of delivering outstanding IQ.
There's one thing that I would like to highlight though.
I remember the time when the D800 proved to have better IQ than the 5D3. Back then many many people swore that a camera is not just the sensor, and that the 5D3's ruggedness and superior AF were unexpendable and very well worth the premium over the D800. They even threw in the rear LCD, just as icing on the cake.
Now the same people say the 6D is a great camera because the sensor's IQ is all you should care about. One-point AF? Not a tragedy. Plasticky construction? It's called light weight. Poor performance? Well, it encourages people to be more interactive with their photography. No fun if the camera does all the effort of focusing at things.
Now I wonder how it would be if the D600 and 6D's specs were swapped... if people would have the same opinion about this camera once the Canon engraving had been removed.
I think not.
I think what makes a Canon camera a Canon isn't because of just name but because of its fabulous L lenses
and even the non-L gold ring lenses (very good primes). 6D isn't plasticky as some here would want to portray. It still has a magnesium alloy body with it's top made of durable polycarbonate material. Do we need another debate on what's more important (lens or body)? The primary reason I'm into Canon system is due to its lenses. I'm not kidding myself that currently, to think otherwise that Nikon has sensors but as many of us experienced, bodies come and go but lenses will always be the consistent factor in taking pictures. That's why investing in lenses rather than bodies is the wisest course to take.
And no, if the Canon trademark is removed, that means the body can't take Canon lenses so most probably, a lot of Canon users won't even consider it.