What will be the issue with the 6D

[verysimplejason]

These photographers (using 5D2) have no issues with their AF either.

http://blogs.reuters.com/fullfocus/2012/11/30/best-photos-of-the-year-2012/#a=95

[Marsu42]

These photographers (using 5D2) have no issues with their AF either.

... but you never know how many shots they dumped because the af missed, phase af performance is not just about speed but also about precision and consistency.

[verysimplejason]

These photographers (using 5D2) have no issues with their AF either.

... but you never know how many shots they dumped because the af missed, phase af performance is not just about speed but also about precision and consistency.

My argument is that if these pros can live with a 5D2, surely they can also live with 6D better.  If they had no issues with 5D2, they won't have any issues with 6D.  As for the shots they dumped, I don't know but what I do know is that they got the shots that they wanted at the end of the day. 

[Marsu42]

I don't know but what I do know is that they got the shots that they wanted at the end of the day. 

But you don't know about the hundreds of pro photogs that never made it to the photo of the year contest because they had the scene of their life in front of them, their af missed, and then it was gone .. and the ranking doesn't compare camera used to scene type (static or action).

Maybe the high 5d2 percentage is because it's not as large as the 1d (mostly horizontal shots in the contest) and/or had good mp count (in 2007), and generally as a pro you are hesitant to change your gear. Plus the 5d2 is not that expensive (important for journalists in developing countries) and easier replaced when broken, two points that are also valid for the 6d.

[verysimplejason]

I don't know but what I do know is that they got the shots that they wanted at the end of the day. 

But you don't know about the hundreds of pro photogs that never made it to the photo of the year contest because they had the scene of their life in front of them, their af missed, and then it was gone .. and the ranking doesn't compare camera used to scene type (static or action).

Maybe the high 5d2 percentage is because it's not as large as the 1d (mostly horizontal shots in the contest) and/or had good mp count (in 2007), and generally as a pro you are hesitant to change your gear. Plus the 5d2 is not that expensive (important for journalists in developing countries) and easier replaced when broken, two points that are also valid for the 6d.

As both of us don't know anything about those AF missed, both you and I don't have the figures to do so, let's just say that whatever 5D2 is capable, 6D is more than capable also.  It's always the head behind the camera that's important.  Sure, if you're not satisfied with AF of 6D, 5D3 and 1DX are always there to satisfy your requirements.  As for 6D, I am sure that it is a professional camera all things considered.

[Marsu42]

As for 6D, I am sure that it is a professional camera all things considered.

Absolutely, it certainly can be used this way - and it's good to know the Reuters figures so I/we can quote that when people say you need at least a 5d3 to make a dime. But still, concerning the missed shots, I've just studied too much statistics to say that the *af* system must be good based on the 5d2 usage, probably it'd be the same amount of 5d2 if it only had mf...

[Chuck Alaimo]

I don't know but what I do know is that they got the shots that they wanted at the end of the day. 

But you don't know about the hundreds of pro photogs that never made it to the photo of the year contest because they had the scene of their life in front of them, their af missed, and then it was gone .. and the ranking doesn't compare camera used to scene type (static or action).

Maybe the high 5d2 percentage is because it's not as large as the 1d (mostly horizontal shots in the contest) and/or had good mp count (in 2007), and generally as a pro you are hesitant to change your gear. Plus the 5d2 is not that expensive (important for journalists in developing countries) and easier replaced when broken, two points that are also valid for the 6d.

this is an odd way to draw a point but it does draw a point!  One must remember that for such things as photojournalism ---it really depends on how the pro is on the assignment.  With many in this field, if they are employed by a news agency they may not have too much of a choice in gear - they may not be using their own gear!  More likely they are on company gear.  news agencies would stock their fleet mostly with 5 series bodies (its how it is in my area at least, the buffalo news togs are mostly on 5dii's with the exception of the sports shooters).

I would guess the percentage in the 2013 version will favor the 5d3 over the mk2 as news agencies replace older bodies with newer ones (or, might we see the 6d filling that roll?)

[cocopop05]

This is the first ever time I have seen two specs that at least on paper the Nikon D600 seems clearly better than the Canon 6D.

Look again - the d600 has worse low-light af than the 6d. Canon may be greedy, but they aren't dumb and have probably isolated the one spec they can best Nikon in while cutting everything else back from the 5d3.

So if you need high iso not for fast shutter speeds (tracking & sports) but for low-light shooting, than an (actually "1") af that can keep up until -3 lv may be more important than a whole array of points that stop at -1 lv. I've read dpreview will do a af comparison 6d vs d600, it'll be interesting.

Valid point Marsu42, however that is the only technical spec where the 6D is superior and it applies to the centre point only. 

Not saying the D600 is better than the 6D, just on paper it seems outdone in many specs by the Nikon.

[Marsu42]

Not saying the D600 is better than the 6D, just on paper it seems outdone in many specs by the Nikon.

You're not saying the d600 is better than the 6d? Then I'm saying it - it blows the 6d out of the water and at a lower price, it's so clear that there isn't even a discussion about it like d800 vs 5d3. The one Achilles' heel (next to video, but I don't do that) of the d600 might be low light af, we'll have a dpreview side-by-side comparisons in the near future.

[atomicpwrd]

Well...I got my 6D...and the Wi-Fi was DOA.  The rest of the camera worked well. I did a shoot with it this weekend before I sent it in for repair.  I have to say, the High-ISO performance is phenomenal.  ISO 1600 looks like 100 on my 7D.

[bvukich]

Not saying the D600 is better than the 6D, just on paper it seems outdone in many specs by the Nikon.

You're not saying the d600 is better than the 6d? Then I'm saying it - it blows the 6d out of the water and at a lower price, it's so clear that there isn't even a discussion about it like d800 vs 5d3. The one Achilles' heel (next to video, but I don't do that) of the d600 might be low light af, we'll have a dpreview side-by-side comparisons in the near future.

Thank you for your opinion, it has been dualy noted.  YOU believe the D600 is a better camera than the 6D, for YOU.  Surprisingly enough, not everyone has the same requirements as you; so your blanket statements declaring the absolute inferiority of the 6D are utterly worthless, and make you look silly.

[Marsu42]

Surprisingly enough, not everyone has the same requirements as you; so your blanket statements declaring the absolute inferiority of the 6D are utterly worthless, and make you look silly.

I also duly note that a mod has a very low pain threshold for posts favoring Nikon :-) ...

... but when your blood pressure went through the roof you overlooked that the post was intended a bit on the striking side, a click on my profile reveals I even did a large compilation of things the 6d is good at: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11309.0

Still, and short since this is rather ot: As an "entry level ff" the d600 has the clear edge, and I dare to say that except for low light af the other things in favor of the 6d are unlikely to matter to the targeted customer group if they aren't bound to a brand by prior investments. Peace.

[bvukich]

Surprisingly enough, not everyone has the same requirements as you; so your blanket statements declaring the absolute inferiority of the 6D are utterly worthless, and make you look silly.

I also duly note that a mod has a very low pain threshold for posts favoring Nikon :-) ...

... but when your blood pressure went through the roof you overlooked that the post was intended a bit on the striking side, a click on my profile reveals I even did a large compilation of things the 6d is good at: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11309.0

Still, and short since this is rather ot: As an "entry level ff" the d600 has the clear edge, and I dare to say that except for low light af the other things in favor of the 6d are unlikely to matter to the targeted customer group if they aren't bound to a brand by prior investments. Peace.

Not so much a low threshold for Nikon favoring, than speaking in absolutes.  I think after all the posts (not from you, but in general) about how the 5D3 was the worst camera ever... and then once users have them in their hands 99% love them.  And now the same thing happening with the 6D, gloom and doom, total Canopocalypse... but actual users seem to like them.  You just happened to be in the blast radius when I was particularly annoyed, so sorry about that.  And just ignore the fact I'm a mod, I'm just a spam/profanity/personal attack janitor, my opinions are purely my own.

Your compilation of things that are good about the 6D is quite excellent.  It's well thought out, objective...  a very valuable post.  I would not hesitate to direct someone trying to decide on 7D/5D2/5D3 in the direction of that post.

"Clear Edge": once again absolutes (grrrr, lol)...  If low light AF is important, high ISO, EF compatibility, or even if WiFi or GPS are important... Then that clear edge may be quite a bit blurier for someone else than it is for you.

[Marsu42]

You just happened to be in the blast radius when I was particularly annoyed, so sorry about that.

Ah, right, sounded like that :-)

But imho the 6d/d600 is not 5d3/d800 all over, because the latter have very distinct differences which let many people indeed believe one is "better" because it suited them more. But the d600 is made for a very similar marketing segment as the 6d, so a comparison is more valid (and I'm sure we'll see a lot shortly) and I expect the 6d to be under heavy pressure. The 6d is saved by the fact that both are excellent cameras, so unless you are choosing a first kit it won't matter much.

"Clear Edge": once again absolutes (grrrr, lol)...  If low light AF is important, high ISO, EF compatibility, or even if WiFi or GPS are important... Then that clear edge may be quite a bit blurier for someone else than it is for you.

Well, unfortunately :-p the Nikon sensor does quite ok when compared even the 6d, ef compatibility is a given, and wifi/gps are nice but esp. gps is hardly a killer feature since it drains the battery and doesn't record the camera direction - I'll keep my external tagger thank you very much...

[skitron]

For me the issue with 6D was IQ. The AF was good as was the ISO. I sent mine back and got a 5D3.