December 08, 2016, 10:04:56 AM

Author Topic: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...  (Read 35704 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 20035
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #60 on: January 02, 2013, 10:32:25 PM »
You need the Nikon grip to do 6 FPS fyi, otherwise you get a meager 4, which isn't a lot in the real world.

6 fps in DX mode only - 1.5x crop FoV and 16 MP. 
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #60 on: January 02, 2013, 10:32:25 PM »

RustyTheGeek

  • Buy and Sell
  • 1D X Mark II
  • ********
  • Posts: 1626
    • Images I've Shot...
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #61 on: January 02, 2013, 10:41:25 PM »
I myself moved from the Terrible to the Just OK class after I returned my camera for an exchange.  At this price range however, I wish there wasn't even a discussion about 5D3 low light AF performance except to question how it can be so good all the time for everyone without question.

So at the moment I am enjoying better low light AF with the 6D but I hope the 5D3 low light AF performance somehow magically improves after the next firmware update. 


Hi Rusty,
Are you talking about the AF flash assist issue or low light focusing in general? For me the two are very different. Thought the 5D3 was pretty hot in the available light focusing department, no?

Well, this has been discussed to death already and some see AF Flash Assist and Low Light focusing as separate issues.  Personally, I see them as related and part of the same problem.  Since every other camera I have ever owned performed better than the 5D3 in Low Light AF performance (in available low light, without AF Assist, FWIW), I expected at least somewhat better AF performance from the new $3K+ 5D3 in this category.  Just call me Crazy!  Alas, after exchanging the camera, I have been able to achieve similar AF low light performance to my older cameras but not much better.  So, I got the 6D to compare and it works much better, like I expected the 5D3 to perform after hearing all the hype for many months.  I've never used AF Assist and to be honest, I had forgotten all about it until I got a 5D3 and started reading up on why the low light AF sucked so much.
Yes, but what would  surapon  say ??  :D

sdsr

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 895
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #62 on: January 02, 2013, 10:54:20 PM »
The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.

+1  true.


Oh? So why is the 6D's low light/high ISO performance better (including obviously less noise) than that of the 5DII?

RS2021

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 718
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #63 on: January 02, 2013, 11:08:31 PM »
The 6D is a repackaged 5D2, which is a repackaged 20D w/ a FF sensor.

+1  true.


Oh? So why is the 6D's low light/high ISO performance better (including obviously less noise) than that of the 5DII?

Because, as I subsequently said... "6D is a warmed up 5D2" .... Obviously it has to up the ante a bit... No one is going to replace the 5D2 *with* a 5D2 ....they need to give people a few frills after 3 years...so we have 6D

"5D2-plus " if you will ...after 3 years wait at 2k ...a worthy upgrade for the suckers... Er...I mean  consumers :)
“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” - Henri Cartier-Bresson

RustyTheGeek

  • Buy and Sell
  • 1D X Mark II
  • ********
  • Posts: 1626
    • Images I've Shot...
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #64 on: January 02, 2013, 11:20:44 PM »

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?

Pixel pitch of 5D Mark II: 6.4 microns
Pixel pitch of 20D: 6.4 microns

Um, is pixel pitch really the spec you are going to support that statement with?   ???
Yes, but what would  surapon  say ??  :D

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 20035
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #65 on: January 02, 2013, 11:22:14 PM »
Because, as I subsequently said... "6D is a warmed up 5D2" .... Obviously it has to up the ante a bit... No one is going to replace the 5D2 *with* a 5D2 ....they need to give people a few frills after 3 years...so we have 6D

"5D2-plus " if you will ...after 3 years wait at 2k ...a worthy upgrade for the suckers... Er...I mean  consumers :)

What makes you think the 6D is intended as an upgrade for 5D Mark II owners?  Did you take a bathroom break or step out to get more popcorn and miss the part where they added an extra 'I' to the Mark designation of the 5DII, when they named the 5D Mark III
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

RustyTheGeek

  • Buy and Sell
  • 1D X Mark II
  • ********
  • Posts: 1626
    • Images I've Shot...
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #66 on: January 02, 2013, 11:28:19 PM »
After some thought, I do have to say that from the perspective of 5D2 owners, the 6D may not be that compelling.  From my perspective as a 5Dc owner who wasn't that excited about the 5D2, the 6D makes more sense.  And the 6D doesn't just make sense to me coming from a 5Dc.  It makes sense coming from a 5D3 if I don't need the super AF for sports.  See, I went from the 5Dc to the 5D3 and was a bit disappointed so the 6D seems like a good compromise for a lot less money.  I'm giving the 5D3 until after the next firmware update to see what improves and then it may go away.  We'll see....
Yes, but what would  surapon  say ??  :D

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #66 on: January 02, 2013, 11:28:19 PM »

RS2021

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 718
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #67 on: January 02, 2013, 11:50:13 PM »
Because, as I subsequently said... "6D is a warmed up 5D2" .... Obviously it has to up the ante a bit... No one is going to replace the 5D2 *with* a 5D2 ....they need to give people a few frills after 3 years...so we have 6D

"5D2-plus " if you will ...after 3 years wait at 2k ...a worthy upgrade for the suckers... Er...I mean  consumers :)

What makes you think the 6D is intended as an upgrade for 5D Mark II owners?  Did you take a bathroom break or step out to get more popcorn and miss the part where they added an extra 'I' to the Mark designation of the 5DII, when they named the 5D Mark III?

In practice, 6d is more a nominal replacement to the old 5d2 as price point and old set of features go...with a few frills added...Not an upgrade "per se" ...perhaps I did not use the right word there if one is pedantic, but in practice it is not that far from the intended near term marketing at its introduction.  Most of the comparisons in forums have been weather one should buy an old 5d2 at the basement prices or if one should get a 6d...that was the tenor of much of the comparisons here even a few months back.  Enter 5d3.... 5d2 still alive...enter 6d... 5d2 put to pasture. Also 5d3 entered at a higher price point that the late comers to 5d2 party, meaning those who adopted it at a lower price point, or considered it at its low end of its tenure pricing, could not readily pick up the 5d3 at its high intro pricing...not until the ebay fire-sales set in anyways...so no, i am fully aware where the 6D fits in the scheme of things.

With 5d3, arguably, canon created a split upgrade path for the old 5d2.... 5d3 is pegged a notch higher (deservedly or not is debatable) with significantly higher features body and AF... meant for the well-heeled 5d2 upgrader. But 6d is more of a lateral slotting in the line up with some tweaks to "update" it for the three years passing...Intended more for the budget conscious consumer who would have bought a bargain priced  5d2 near its end of cycle or would have remained longer with 5d2 if they already owned one.

And the discussion would be more productive without the holy indignation and movie break analogies. Cheers   :P
« Last Edit: January 03, 2013, 12:25:51 AM by Ray2021 »
“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” - Henri Cartier-Bresson

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3111
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #68 on: January 03, 2013, 12:02:40 AM »
Because, as I subsequently said... "6D is a warmed up 5D2" .... Obviously it has to up the ante a bit... No one is going to replace the 5D2 *with* a 5D2 ....they need to give people a few frills after 3 years...so we have 6D

"5D2-plus " if you will ...after 3 years wait at 2k ...a worthy upgrade for the suckers... Er...I mean  consumers :)

What makes you think the 6D is intended as an upgrade for 5D Mark II owners?  Did you take a bathroom break or step out to get more popcorn and miss the part where they added an extra 'I' to the Mark designation of the 5DII, when they named the 5D Mark III?

Well if a 5D Mark II owner is concerned about IQ then the 5D Mark III isn't an upgrade either.

Regardless, his point still stands.  The 6D isn't an intended upgrade to 5D Mark II owners.
2 x 1DX
B1G, MAC, GLIAC

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3111
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #69 on: January 03, 2013, 12:11:37 AM »
I'd like to see an IQ and DR upgrade over the 5D Mark II.  I think we'll have to wait for the 1Ds Mark III's true replacement for that.

Fortunately, I see the 5D3 as an upgrade.  If it still shoots the same IQ as the 5D2, AND has a much improved AF system, that's an improvement for me.  Now instead of having to buy the 5D2 and 7D, I can use a single camera, if I'm using those bodies.  Pros?  Eh, they'll just get a 1D4 or 1DX anyways if it is truly AF they need.
2 x 1DX
B1G, MAC, GLIAC

RustyTheGeek

  • Buy and Sell
  • 1D X Mark II
  • ********
  • Posts: 1626
    • Images I've Shot...
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #70 on: January 03, 2013, 12:20:33 AM »
Because, as I subsequently said... "6D is a warmed up 5D2" .... Obviously it has to up the ante a bit... No one is going to replace the 5D2 *with* a 5D2 ....they need to give people a few frills after 3 years...so we have 6D

"5D2-plus " if you will ...after 3 years wait at 2k ...a worthy upgrade for the suckers... Er...I mean  consumers :)

What makes you think the 6D is intended as an upgrade for 5D Mark II owners?  Did you take a bathroom break or step out to get more popcorn and miss the part where they added an extra 'I' to the Mark designation of the 5DII, when they named the 5D Mark III?

Well if a 5D Mark II owner is concerned about IQ then the 5D Mark III isn't an upgrade either.

Regardless, his point still stands.  The 6D isn't an intended upgrade to 5D Mark II owners.

Indeed, many 5D Mark II owners are still waiting for a camera that is an upgrade to the 5D Mark II.

OK, wow.  Now you really have me confused.  If there hasn't been a decent upgrade since the 20D, what are we even discussing?  The 6D and the 5DIII aren't decent upgrades to the 5D2 and the 5D2 wasn't a decent upgrade to the 20D.  It sounds like the entire Canon lineup since the 20D has been a huge waste of time.  So why am I not still shooting everything with my 30D?  It was indeed a great camera. 

To a certain extent I guess I have to agree since I still love my 5Dc.  And yet, RLPhoto is using two 5D3 units and I am enjoying both my 5D3 and 6D for their respective strengths.  So for some reason I still felt like the 30D needed replacement way back when.  And in the last couple months, I decided to upgrade from the 5Dc to the 5D3 and 6D.  I guess I'm just another one of those suckers that doesn't have the good sense to stick with my 30D and 5Dc for another 5 years or so while everyone else upgrades.
Yes, but what would  surapon  say ??  :D

RS2021

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 718
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #71 on: January 03, 2013, 12:42:49 AM »
I decided to upgrade from the 5Dc to the 5D3 and 6D.  I guess I'm just another one of those suckers that doesn't have the good sense to stick with my 30D and 5Dc for another 5 years or so while everyone else upgrades.

Now you are conflating two things...neither RLPhoto nor I said anything about 5d3... His original comment and my "+1" was confined to 6d and I agree the 20d part was a bit of a stretch in his wording but not that far in essence.

5d3 is an upgrade to 5d2 and has merit...6d is more of an "updated" 5d2. Perhaps it is semantics, but it matters.
“Sharpness is a bourgeois concept” - Henri Cartier-Bresson

zim

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1462
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #72 on: January 03, 2013, 05:27:30 AM »
I myself moved from the Terrible to the Just OK class after I returned my camera for an exchange.  At this price range however, I wish there wasn't even a discussion about 5D3 low light AF performance except to question how it can be so good all the time for everyone without question.

So at the moment I am enjoying better low light AF with the 6D but I hope the 5D3 low light AF performance somehow magically improves after the next firmware update. 


Hi Rusty,
Are you talking about the AF flash assist issue or low light focusing in general? For me the two are very different. Thought the 5D3 was pretty hot in the available light focusing department, no?

Well, this has been discussed to death already and some see AF Flash Assist and Low Light focusing as separate issues.  Personally, I see them as related and part of the same problem.  Since every other camera I have ever owned performed better than the 5D3 in Low Light AF performance (in available low light, without AF Assist, FWIW), I expected at least somewhat better AF performance from the new $3K+ 5D3 in this category.  Just call me Crazy!  Alas, after exchanging the camera, I have been able to achieve similar AF low light performance to my older cameras but not much better.  So, I got the 6D to compare and it works much better, like I expected the 5D3 to perform after hearing all the hype for many months.  I've never used AF Assist and to be honest, I had forgotten all about it until I got a 5D3 and started reading up on why the low light AF sucked so much.


Thanks for clarifying that for me, albeit rather worrying clarity! I guess I’m really going to have to use both these cameras to make my decision. I’d much rather use the money for a lens rather than rent though. It’s the first time I’ve felt the need to do this and that in itself makes me feel that there is something wrong about buying anything right now other than glass.


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #72 on: January 03, 2013, 05:27:30 AM »

nickorando

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 17
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #73 on: January 03, 2013, 05:37:44 AM »
From the 20D to the 30D, there was no change in IQ, some even argued it got worse. The screen on the back changed and that was it. The 40D was marginally better than the 20D with a few extra megapixels thrown in. The 50D delivered IQ that was still measured to be about the same as the 20D plus a few extra megapixels on top of the 40D. Whilst the 50D can now shoot at ISO 12800, nobody really does because you can't recognise anything above ISO 3200. The 60D gave us even more MP but still the IQ hasn't gone anywhere and wasn't really that different to the 50D.

And yes, a lot of people are sick of Canon offering something almost the same as what the new camera replaces except something a little better.

What absolute garbage. The 20D had the worst IQ of just about any Canon DSLR - worse than the 10D it replaced. The 30D was a massive upgrade even if only for the rear screen that was actually usable. The 40D wasn't "marginally better" it was significantly better in both operational and IQ terms. Night and day better. Every camera since has had massively better IQ - only the 50D has been a bit of a lemon on the IQ front, and then only because of terrible high ISO performance.

As to the 6D, I'm sick of idiots who have never used it passing their uninformed and unintelligent opinions of it. For me, it's the perfect upgrade from my 5D II because it addresses everything that bothered me about the Mark II - I know that doesn't apply to everyone, but I'm not everyone, I'm me. For all those who only care about specifications and moan constantly about Canon I care not one jot - for me, Canon keep producing the right product at the right time that does the job I want it to in the real world rather than on a spec sheet. Even if there was anything in the Nikon range that looked superior to me for my needs - and frankly, there really isn't, Canon are far better at working out what I want than Nikon are - I've got so much invested in the Canon system that it would cost me an absolute fortune to change, which makes Canon's products much better value for me. Just having WiFi and GPS built in with no size, weight or additional cost - wow! The WFT-E4 cost me a fortune, and weighs a ton. Maybe I'm extremely lucky, but Canon seem to be reading my mind and producing exactly what I want - it's as though Canon are Nickorando fanboys. ;)

kubelik

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 824
Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #74 on: January 03, 2013, 09:18:10 AM »
the whole discussion of whether or not there has been any real change between the 30D and the 5D Mark II is a good demonstration of how different people look at cameras.

for those who purely look at a camera as a sensor, or purely as an AF module, and judge it from there, perhaps the 5D Mark II doesn't appear any different than the 30D.  same pixel pitch, same 9 points, etc.

I have owned the 30D (shot 30,000+ photos) and 5D Mark II (shot 60,000+ photos) and they are vastly different cameras to me.  from viewfinder size, build quality, rear LCD, high-ISO handling, physical handling, and even per-pixel image quality (judged by cropping 5DII down to the same 8 MP image of the 30D), the 5D Mark II smashes the 30D in every way.  I could barely touch the 30D after buying the 5DII, and sold it pretty quickly.  I couldn't conceive of a single instance in which I would have pulled out the 30D over the 5DII.  so for me, judging a camera as a sum total of all the things that go into making a usable camera, there is a massive difference between the 30D and the 5DII.

whether or not there's an equally large gap between the 5DII and 6D will similarly be up to the individual user.  I can't speak even for myself on that, because I haven't shot anything with a 6D yet.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Moving to FF Canon vs Nikon - I'm Confused...
« Reply #74 on: January 03, 2013, 09:18:10 AM »