Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...

[Albi86]

I have a canon 550d rebel and was considering the "jump" to FF.

The Canon 6d is in my budget. However the Nikon D800 is available (refurb) for $2,300.

I ask myself - why spend almost the same on the inferior 6d ? Why does canon seem to give less and charge more ?

If you don't plan to spend several grands on those few lenses which have no Nikon or 3rd party alternative, then buy a Nikon.

[Sony]

Better lenses give better images. What do you want in photography? Good pics or what? I switched from Nikon to Canon just because of better images. It cost me but Im happy now with my tough decision. Nikon's lenses arent as good as Canon's. If I were you I would stay with Canon's lenses and move up. It's reality.

[bdunbar79]

What practical or business advantage does the D800 offer over the 6D?  I can't think of any if you already have Canon lenses.  And vice versa if you already had Nikon system.

[cliffwang]

I have a canon 550d rebel and was considering the "jump" to FF.

The Canon 6d is in my budget. However the Nikon D800 is available (refurb) for $2,300.

I ask myself - why spend almost the same on the inferior 6d ? Why does canon seem to give less and charge more ?

If you don't have any EF lens, switching to Nikon may work for you.  Nowadays, third party lenses are amazing.  If you think the following lenses are you going to use, you could switch to to Nikon.

14-24(Nikon)
24-70(Tamron)
70-200(Tamron)
35mm(Sigma)
50mm(Sigma)
85mm(Sigma)

If you need other lenses, you have to consider Canon.

[RustyTheGeek]

The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.

Save your dough and buy a used 5D2+glass or a 5D3.

I keep seeing this same post by RLPhoto in response to the 6D over and over.  I consider RLPhoto a solid and talented photographer who consistently offers great advice here, no offense is intended by my comment but...  his response to the 6D is out of character for him because it indicates an assumption opinion apparently based on specs that isn't backed up by first hand experience.  And the repeated posting of it seems to indicate a desire to prevent others from making a mistake in purchasing the 6D.

I've shot about 4000+ images so far with the 6D I've owned for about a month.  I also own the 5D3, 60D, 40D, 30D and original 5D.  I've shot the 5D2 as well.  The 5D3 and 6D are the first NIB bodies I've purchased.  I normally purchase most of my equipment used.  I agree that the current Canon prices are ridiculous.  I purchased the 6D because I find the 5D3 low light performance and AF to be lacking.  In another month or two I will likely sell either the 5D3 or the 6D.  If Canon somehow magically fixes the 5D3 AF I would be inclined to possibly keep it but as things stand now, unless I do a lot of sports shooting (which I don't), the 6D will easily win this decision.

I can assure you that IMHO (based on actual use) the 6D is not a repackaged 5D2, 20D or whatever is being assumed.  The 6D IQ is comparable to the 5D3 IQ and the 6D is superior to all other cameras in low light.  The 6D simply works great as an entry level (or even mid level) FF camera.  Everything I have read from actual 6D hands-on use and reviews is positive.  My knee-jerk reaction to the 6D spec sheet several months ago was also negative.  But I gave it a chance and I'm glad I did.

[neuroanatomist]

and there are enough tests that show that nikkors are often better then the equivalent canon.

Which ones?  24-70?  Canon wins (with the MkII, that is).  24-105?  Canon wins.  70-200/2.8?  Canon wins.  TS-E/PC-E 24mm?  Canon wins.  Pretty much the entire supertele lineup?  Canon wins.  UWA zoom?  Nikon wins.  Macro lenses?  Toss-up on quality, Canon wins on variety.  Fast primes?  About an even split.

So, where's the list of 'often better' Nikkors?

[RustyTheGeek]

I agree with neuro - Canon has been known for their exceptional lens lineup for years.  Nothing necc wrong with Nikon if that's the system you're invested in but if you're just starting out, Canon is hard to beat on lenses and Canon adds/updates lenses on a consistent timeline.  Canon has recently increased their new lens prices but hopefully that will change in 2013.  The quality is still there, it's just a little too expensive for new at the moment.

[RS2021]

The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.

+1  true.

Canon plays it safe nowadays and makes incremental moves since the past 2 decades. They used to be a lot bolder (remember the FD to EF mount jump?). Big dog syndrome has set in since the 90's.

[RS2021]

and there are enough tests that show that nikkors are often better then the equivalent canon.

 This is patently false, Canon by reputation which translates to the obvious supremacy in market share owns the consumer and professional SLR lens market today...you have to move up to higher formats to see other players and Canon wisely doesn't dabble in those markets. So much so, their supremacy in the SLR lens market is in fact the basis of their marketing leverage in pricing their bodies a smidge higher, and getting away with small annoyances like not including hoods even for some 1K L's (70-200L  f/4 IS for example). This is the typical behaviour of a confident company that says "see what I can get away with...suck it up".

Nikon had a leg up in the UWA zoom range...but somehow I think this will be rectified very very soon by Canon.

[RustyTheGeek]

The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.

+1  true.

Canon plays it safe nowadays and makes incremental moves since the past 2 decades. They used to be a lot bolder (remember the FD to EF mount jump?). Big dog syndrome has set in since the 90's.

I wish that someone who has actual experience using multiple Canon cameras (including the 6D) would explain what ...

'The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.'

... even means.  It sounds like an assertion that Canon cameras haven't changed in 10+ years.  And many seem to agree.  What am I missing?  And if this is the case, why is Canon equipment still in their bag?

[RustyTheGeek]

and there are enough tests that show that nikkors are often better then the equivalent canon.

 This is patently false, Canon by reputation which translates to the obvious supremacy in market share owns the consumer and professional SLR lens market today...you have to move up to higher formats to see other players and Canon wisely doesn't dabble in those markets. So much so, their supremacy in the SLR lens market is in fact the basis of their marketing leverage in pricing their bodies a smidge higher, and getting away with small annoyances like not including hoods even for some 1K L's (70-200L  f/4 IS for example). This is the typical behaviour of a confident company that says "see what I can get away with...suck it up".

Nikon had a leg up in the UWA zoom range...but somehow I think this will be rectified very very soon by Canon.

Canon is a very large company with many divisions besides photography.  They have a lot of resources to draw from to produce exceptional products.  I completely agree that they do whatever they think they can get away with with regard to price and small annoyances like omitting hoods, etc from $1K lens offerings, etc.  That is the irritation I feel when buying Canon these days.  They send the message with these habits that they don't really care about your pocketbook or loyalty because they assume they will have both anyway.  It's a bit insulting.  And since I don't make a living from photography, I occasionally wonder why I even bother.  Sometimes selling everything and just going back to having a single body and 2 or 3 good lenses and a flash sounds mighty appealing.  Take that Canon!  (Me = insignificant consumer insect shaking tiny insect fist at mighty Canon juggernaut.)

[RS2021]

I wish that someone who has actual experience using multiple Canon cameras (including the 6D) would explain what ...

'The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.'

... even means.  It sounds like an assertion that Canon cameras haven't changed in 10+ years.  And many seem to agree.  What am I missing?  And if this is the case, why is Canon equipment still in their bag?

This is not a personal attack on Canon's overall quality...just calling it like it is... 6D is a safe move up introducing some new features... it is an incremental move...not a revolutionary move by any means...that's what the comment made by me and others means...

I also said in a different thread that once the 6D price settles down from the initial high, it would be a good value and a competent camera in its own right.

I may be a Canon user, but I don't believe in mindlessly defending Canon at every turn where every single thing they do is the second coming that needs to be venerated and praised to high heavens. Sometimes what they do is just plain ordinary or market driven and that's ok too.

I use Canon because I like the overall platform. I call the 6D an incremental move because it is.

[RS2021]

.... Sometimes selling everything and just going back to having a single body and 2 or 3 good lenses and a flash sounds mighty appealing.  Take that Canon!  (Me = insignificant consumer insect shaking tiny insect fist at mighty Canon juggernaut.)

Oh but that will be like cutting one's nose to spite the face....so when push comes to shove, neither I nor you would want to go back to the early years...

But... "shaking tiny insect fists at Canon"....all of us users have been there at some point and can empathize I am sure.

[ScottyP]

I wish that someone who has actual experience using multiple Canon cameras (including the 6D) would explain what ...

'The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.'

... even means.  It sounds like an assertion that Canon cameras haven't changed in 10+ years.  And many seem to agree.  What am I missing?  And if this is the case, why is Canon equipment still in their bag?

This is not a personal attack on Canon's overall quality...just calling it like it is... 6D is a safe move up introducing some new features... it is an incremental move...not a revolutionary move by any means...that's what the comment made by me and others means...

I also said in a different thread that once the 6D price settles down from the initial high, it would be a good value and a competent camera in its own right.

I may be a Canon user, but I don't believe in mindlessly defending Canon at every turn where every single thing they do is the second coming that needs to be venerated and praised to high heavens. Sometimes what they do is just plain ordinary or market driven and that's ok too.

I use Canon because I like the overall platform. I call the 6D an incremental move because it is.

Geez.  I'm all for not sparing Canon any well-deserved criticism, but "a repackaged 5D2 which is in turn a repackaged 20d, only with a FF"?  You gloss over the swap from crop to FF pretty dismissively, and then you gloss over the gain of a stop or 2 of low-light performance between 5D2 and 6D (and I guess 3 or 4 stops between 20D and 6D) as if they were nothing.  What, exactly would constutute a meaningful advance, assuming the end result will still look like a camera and do what a camera does?  I suppose all these cameras are still black, and still have a shutter button, so there is nothing groundbreaking like, what, mounting 3 lenses at the same time, and maybe a tractor beam, or the ability to resurect one's ancestors? 

[neuroanatomist]

6D is a safe move up introducing some new features... it is an incremental move...not a revolutionary move by any means...

Sometimes what they do is just plain ordinary or market driven and that's ok too.

Can you name a revolutionary move or two, by Canon or others, just for comparison?  I think the last 'revolutionary' releases were the Contax N Digital and the 1Ds, the very first full frame CCD and CMOS dSLRs.  Pretty much everything since then has been 'just plain ordinary' and 'market driven' incremental improvements.  A few more MP.  More AF points.  More cross-type AF points.  A couple more fps.  More metering zones.  Etc.