Canon 6D Dominates Low Light Focusing Test vs 5Dii, 5Diii & Nikon D600

[neuroanatomist]

Just be careful.  You have been warned.   

[Area256]

I understand we're talking about focus speed and sensitivity of the central point, but has anyone tested the outer points with fast glass in terms of focus accuracy? Most of the tests I've found on the web, like Roger's, concern the central point exclusively.
I'm asking this because 11 AF points should be enough for me, if they're all really usable. Maybe the only situation for which I actually need the outer points is when shooting with a very shallow DoF and placing the focus zone very off-center, when composition would change too much and the focus-and-recompose technique would sure fail. (If the subject is not so close to the camera, then the angle changes little when recomposing and I can usually take a sharp pic, even with a shallow DoF.)
I sure appreciate -3 EV sensitivity, but in very low-light situations I won't be playing around with composition anyway, and having one reliable, sensitive central point sounds good enough, IMO. The precision of the outer points concerns me the most, for I can't rely very much on them when shooting with my 60D, even in reasonably well-lit situations.
(Sorry if it's been discussed before; I searched, but found nothing.)
Thanks!
Daniel

I suspect the precision of the outer points on the 6D will be at best the same or a little worse than the 60D...

The main problem with precision of the outer points on any camera (save the 5D3), is that they are normally f/5.6 sensitive points, which aren't as precise as the f/2.8 sensitive points sometimes found on the center AF point(s).

All of the 60D's AF points are f/5.6 cross type, and there is an additional f/2.8 cross type sensor overlapping the center point.   Since the 6D's outer points are f/5.6 line sensors, I'd expect, assuming good light and contrast in the right direction, their precision will be about the same.

There will likely differences in how well they respond with different light and target sizes.  And the fact they are only line sensors, will do other things to effect the hit rate.  Just how much of a difference is hard to quantify / no one has tested yet.

Sadly I don't have the equipment to test this formally, but I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Also this is kind of the reality of almost all modern AF systems... The outer points tend to have less precision than the inner points, which is annoying since aside from action photography, the use of the outer points is almost always for fast lenses where focus-and-recompose breaks down - and where precision is extra important..  I tend to use LV and manual focus when I'm working with close subjects and fast lenses.

[DanielW]

Sadly I don't have the equipment to test this formally, but I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Great! Can't wait to see the results!

[skitron]

...I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Let me know what you think of the way 6D renders colors and lighting dynamics. Now that I've moved on from testing to actual pictures, I am not liking what I am seeing in this respect. I'm shooting RAW and the the 6D files have a very different character than do 5D2 files imo, and not in a good way.

[verysimplejason]

...I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Let me know what you think of the way 6D renders colors and lighting dynamics. Now that I've moved on from testing to actual pictures, I am not liking what I am seeing in this respect. I'm shooting RAW and the the 6D files have a very different character than do 5D2 files imo, and not in a good way.

Can you please expound on this?  We want to know what's the difference...  And try using the updated DPP if possible when converting the 6D and 5D2 files.  The jpeg rendering of other software might not be as updated.

Thanks.

[skitron]

...I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Let me know what you think of the way 6D renders colors and lighting dynamics. Now that I've moved on from testing to actual pictures, I am not liking what I am seeing in this respect. I'm shooting RAW and the the 6D files have a very different character than do 5D2 files imo, and not in a good way.

Can you please expound on this?  We want to know what's the difference...  And try using the updated DPP if possible when converting the 6D and 5D2 files.  The jpeg rendering of other software might not be as updated.

Thanks.

I'll try to explain using subjective terms and maybe a technical measurement or two.

To my eyes, everything is underexposed a significant amount and this is verified when looking at the RGB histogram in Capture One. Left side is towards the top and then a smooth slope to zero on the right for typical outdoor shots. Equivalent shots with 5D2 are exposed the way I'd expect and hisotgram is more level with some peaks, as expected.

Color renditions are flat and lifeless to my eyes. This is true just comparing equivalent shots from 5D2 and 6D and looking at the RAWs. Same holds true after working with them in Capture One. Let me put it this way: in adequate light, I'd take my 50D over the 6D in a heartbeat for exposure, color rendition and DR (as lacking as 50D was in DR)...the equvalent shots just look a lot better to my eyes.

I know there is a bunch of chatter about how 6D has better DR, but when shooting it seems the exact opposite and shadows are going black with no detail in the RAWs.

It's hard to quantify this sort of thing, but when I first got my 5D2 I was pleasantly stunned how good any shot looked. It's just the opposite with 6D for me and I'm stunned how un-Canon like all of my shots were. Yes, were. As in its boxed up to go back in exchange for a 5D3.

And I suppose that sums it up for me. As you can see in my earlier posts, I was happy as could be with the AF and low light when I tested it. But then when I started shooting it, it became quickly apparent I'd be sending it back and just spending the extra $ for a 5D3. And for me anyway, I'll spend $400 extra over the eBay price to buy it from B&H so I have no doubt it will have a warranty and I can send it back if I have an issue like I did with the 6D I bought from them...

Of course this is all just my opinion and YMMV. Maybe I got a dud, but bottom line is I'm going 5D3 instead.

[unxpectederror]

is anyone quite surprised with the results of the 5d2? i just got one in the other week and it focus's better then my T4i which has 9 cross type point...

[verysimplejason]

...I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Let me know what you think of the way 6D renders colors and lighting dynamics. Now that I've moved on from testing to actual pictures, I am not liking what I am seeing in this respect. I'm shooting RAW and the the 6D files have a very different character than do 5D2 files imo, and not in a good way.

Can you please expound on this?  We want to know what's the difference...  And try using the updated DPP if possible when converting the 6D and 5D2 files.  The jpeg rendering of other software might not be as updated.

Thanks.

I'll try to explain using subjective terms and maybe a technical measurement or two.

To my eyes, everything is underexposed a significant amount and this is verified when looking at the RGB histogram in Capture One. Left side is towards the top and then a smooth slope to zero on the right for typical outdoor shots. Equivalent shots with 5D2 are exposed the way I'd expect and hisotgram is more level with some peaks, as expected.

Color renditions are flat and lifeless to my eyes. This is true just comparing equivalent shots from 5D2 and 6D and looking at the RAWs. Same holds true after working with them in Capture One. Let me put it this way: in adequate light, I'd take my 50D over the 6D in a heartbeat for exposure, color rendition and DR (as lacking as 50D was in DR)...the equvalent shots just look a lot better to my eyes.

I know there is a bunch of chatter about how 6D has better DR, but when shooting it seems the exact opposite and shadows are going black with no detail in the RAWs.

It's hard to quantify this sort of thing, but when I first got my 5D2 I was pleasantly stunned how good any shot looked. It's just the opposite with 6D for me and I'm stunned how un-Canon like all of my shots were. Yes, were. As in its boxed up to go back in exchange for a 5D3.

And I suppose that sums it up for me. As you can see in my earlier posts, I was happy as could be with the AF and low light when I tested it. But then when I started shooting it, it became quickly apparent I'd be sending it back and just spending the extra $ for a 5D3. And for me anyway, I'll spend $400 extra over the eBay price to buy it from B&H so I have no doubt it will have a warranty and I can send it back if I have an issue like I did with the 6D I bought from them...

Of course this is all just my opinion and YMMV. Maybe I got a dud, but bottom line is I'm going 5D3 instead.

Have you tried using DPP?  I don't think Capture One is updated already to handle raw files from 6D.  Just like Lightroom needs an update or a new profile just to handle other new bodies.  WTH, even DPP needs an update to correctly render raw files from new bodies.  Agreed, maybe you got a bum copy because, I have never seen anyone complain about the DR/IQ of 6D except for underexposing which could be easily adjusted by Canon Support if needed. 

Anyway, good choice.  I'd always say, if you think you've got the money to afford a 5D3, then go for it.  Granted it's more expensive but it's more versatile.  However, for some, I think it will be 6D.  I've got a friend who just got a 6D yesterday.  Hopefully, he brings it to office tomorrow so I can see it and maybe compare it with some cameras from our group.

[Area256]

...I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Let me know what you think of the way 6D renders colors and lighting dynamics. Now that I've moved on from testing to actual pictures, I am not liking what I am seeing in this respect. I'm shooting RAW and the the 6D files have a very different character than do 5D2 files imo, and not in a good way.

I processed a few shoots of the same scene with same settings (ISO 100)/lens with the 60D and 6D, then looked at the RAWs in CPP.  Both were basically identical in terms of color and DR (although CPP was applying the same tone curve so that should be expected).  I don't think there was a major difference between the 60D and the 5D2.  So I'm not sure what's happening in your case.

I also tried pushing the shadows in both, and didn't notice any real difference between the 60D and 6D.  A tad better in the 6D, but nothing to write home about.  The area the 6D really seems to shine is high ISO, where it clearly dominates the 60D.  But again, color looks the same on both.

[Area256]

...I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Let me know what you think of the way 6D renders colors and lighting dynamics. Now that I've moved on from testing to actual pictures, I am not liking what I am seeing in this respect. I'm shooting RAW and the the 6D files have a very different character than do 5D2 files imo, and not in a good way.

I processed a few shoots of the same scene with same settings (ISO 100)/lens with the 60D and 6D, then looked at the RAWs in CPP.  Both were basically identical in terms of color and DR (although CPP was applying the same tone curve so that should be expected).  I don't think there was a major difference between the 60D and the 5D2.  So I'm not sure what's happening in your case.

I also tried pushing the shadows in both, and didn't notice any real difference between the 60D and 6D.  A tad better in the 6D, but nothing to write home about.  The area the 6D really seems to shine is high ISO, where it clearly dominates the 60D.  But again, color looks the same on both.

I just tried Capture One.  Images look almost exactly the same as CPP.  And I got very impressive shadow detail recovery on the 6D in Capture One.  Sadly I think your camera must be a bad copy.

[skitron]

...I will have a 60D and 6D tomorrow for some rough analysis.

Let me know what you think of the way 6D renders colors and lighting dynamics. Now that I've moved on from testing to actual pictures, I am not liking what I am seeing in this respect. I'm shooting RAW and the the 6D files have a very different character than do 5D2 files imo, and not in a good way.

I processed a few shoots of the same scene with same settings (ISO 100)/lens with the 60D and 6D, then looked at the RAWs in CPP.  Both were basically identical in terms of color and DR (although CPP was applying the same tone curve so that should be expected).  I don't think there was a major difference between the 60D and the 5D2.  So I'm not sure what's happening in your case.

I also tried pushing the shadows in both, and didn't notice any real difference between the 60D and 6D.  A tad better in the 6D, but nothing to write home about.  The area the 6D really seems to shine is high ISO, where it clearly dominates the 60D.  But again, color looks the same on both.

I just tried Capture One.  Images look almost exactly the same as CPP.  And I got very impressive shadow detail recovery on the 6D in Capture One.  Sadly I think your camera must be a bad copy.

Mine very well could have been a dud but I was thinking I'd like the improved video of 5D3 anyway so just went ahead and did it. I'm sure I'll like the 'even better' AF though the 6D AF was fine in my book.

Yes, the Capture One v7 shadow recovery tools are pretty amazing.