Help to make my decision.

[wayno]

I wasn't aware there was an increase in DR in the 6D? Not beyond marginal, at least?
For the OP's needs the 5d2 sounds perfect and I think the 'raft' of extra features in the 6D (in this instance) are not exactly essential. Nice to have but are they really useful? I would suggest the extra ISO capacity is the only enticement... And maybe just enough to justify the extra... The decision is not as clear cut as some would make out though, IMO

[ishdakuteb]

Or you can look at it this way:
The 5DII was the successor to the 5D, and a great camera.
The 5DIII is the successor to the 5DIII, also a great camera.

The 5DIII is the successor to the 5DIII, also a great camera. <-- not until april (firmware release month) 

[Marsu42]

I wasn't aware there was an increase in DR in the 6D? Not beyond marginal, at least?

Nothing to get excited about, but still: http://www.sensorgen.info/

For the OP's needs the 5d2 sounds perfect and I think the 'raft' of extra features in the 6D (in this instance) are not exactly essential. Nice to have but are they really useful? I would suggest the extra ISO capacity is the only enticement...

Personally I like the silent shutter and the decrease in banding with is said to often hinder raising shadows on the 5d2 even in low iso. Also better metering/awb an some more fps are not to be disregarded, but of course ymmv concerning your shooting habits.

Most fw improvements of the 6d can be had on the 5d2 is using Magic Lantern though, except for the improved afma.

[RLPhoto]

So why waste those extra 500$?

Well, some things come to mind... (from http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=1130)

• higher iso capability
• less banding
• higher dynamic range
• center-point af up to -3lv
• silent shutter
• faster fps
• longer battery life
• shorter release time
• better metering & auto-wb
• hi-res lcd
• small & light but good grip
• top wheel lock
• gps built-in
• wifi built-in
• newer firmware:
  
  • full support for rt flashes,
  • in-camera multishot/hdr
  • in-camera ca correction
  • 7x bracketing
  • dual afma for zooms
  • servo af customization
  • flexible min/max auto-iso
  • min shutter speed setting
  • orientation-linked af point

+1 ... And also remote shooting with a smartphone and better weather sealing

Or $500 in depreciation I suppose rather than invest in another lens. 

[sdsr]

Help me to make right decision, I've been shooting with 7D now +2 years and been looking for moving to FF. Basically what my gear includes now is 7D with 17-55 F2.8 and basic kit 15-135 that is not used like at all.. and now shooting with 7D these couple years I've noticed that my pictures are almost 50% portraits and 50% landscapes, cityscapes etc.

What should I do, been looking for to get 5D Mark II?

Unless you can get a 5DII for considerably less than a 6D or don't have much interest in shooting in low light/high ISO (or the other features listed by Marsu42), and because you don't have any lenses that will fit a FF camera, I would suggest you forget about the 5DII and instead consider a 6D & kit lens (i.e., 24-105L) - there are (or recently have been) very good deals featuring such a kit, and that lens is a good one to start with.  If you *do* like shooting in low light, the 6D will amaze you (of course, coming from a 7D you would likely be amazed by the 5DII as well, but the 6D is even better).  The anti-6D brigade strike me as protesting a bit too much....

[Area256]

So why waste those extra 500$?

Well, some things come to mind... (from http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=1130)

• higher iso capability
• less banding
• higher dynamic range
• center-point af up to -3lv
• silent shutter
• faster fps
• longer battery life
• shorter release time
• better metering & auto-wb
• hi-res lcd
• small & light but good grip
• top wheel lock
• gps built-in
• wifi built-in
• newer firmware:
  
  • full support for rt flashes,
  • in-camera multishot/hdr
  • in-camera ca correction
  • 7x bracketing
  • dual afma for zooms
  • servo af customization
  • flexible min/max auto-iso
  • min shutter speed setting
  • orientation-linked af point

+1 I got the 6D over the the 5D2 for many of these reasons.   I shoot low light, but not action, so the 6D saved me some $$ over the 5D3, and still delivered in low light - and I to had to have auto ISO in manual.   If don't need the new stuff though, the 5D2 is a great deal.

[Dylan777]

You have no FF lenses, which mean's you might as well just sell everything and start new with FF.

1. Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC.
2. Canon 100mm F/2
3. 5D2 or 5D3.

Skip 6D, Not good value for $$$.

I WOULDN'T do that - I would skip 5D II and take 6D for these reasons.

1. Newer camera - with extra features, wifi etc
2. True Auto ISO in "M" mode, 5D II has fixed auto ISO at 400
3. Better AF - more accurate then 5D II

In actual use, the 6D will fail in everything the 5D2 will performance wise and no better than the 5D2 in getting the shot. Same FPS, nearly identical terrible AF, and 98% viewfinder. The 5D3 will have none of these limits.

So why waste those extra 500$? Get another lens. Don't waste it on the fluff from the 6D and that's why I consider it bad value for $$$.

In which way? 6D AF center point is way MUCH BETTER 5D II, so what is your point?

[RLPhoto]

You have no FF lenses, which mean's you might as well just sell everything and start new with FF.

1. Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC.
2. Canon 100mm F/2
3. 5D2 or 5D3.

Skip 6D, Not good value for $$$.

I WOULDN'T do that - I would skip 5D II and take 6D for these reasons.

1. Newer camera - with extra features, wifi etc
2. True Auto ISO in "M" mode, 5D II has fixed auto ISO at 400
3. Better AF - more accurate then 5D II

In actual use, the 6D will fail in everything the 5D2 will performance wise and no better than the 5D2 in getting the shot. Same FPS, nearly identical terrible AF, and 98% viewfinder. The 5D3 will have none of these limits.

So why waste those extra 500$? Get another lens. Don't waste it on the fluff from the 6D and that's why I consider it bad value for $$$.

In which way? 6D AF center point is way MUCH BETTER 5D II, so what is your point?

 your still stuck only using the center point. That's the issue.

[Dylan777]

You have no FF lenses, which mean's you might as well just sell everything and start new with FF.

1. Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC.
2. Canon 100mm F/2
3. 5D2 or 5D3.

Skip 6D, Not good value for $$$.

I WOULDN'T do that - I would skip 5D II and take 6D for these reasons.

1. Newer camera - with extra features, wifi etc
2. True Auto ISO in "M" mode, 5D II has fixed auto ISO at 400
3. Better AF - more accurate then 5D II

In actual use, the 6D will fail in everything the 5D2 will performance wise and no better than the 5D2 in getting the shot. Same FPS, nearly identical terrible AF, and 98% viewfinder. The 5D3 will have none of these limits.

So why waste those extra 500$? Get another lens. Don't waste it on the fluff from the 6D and that's why I consider it bad value for $$$.

In which way? 6D AF center point is way MUCH BETTER 5D II, so what is your point?

 your still stuck only using the center point. That's the issue.

Are you saying 5D II has better outer AF points then 6D? Both of these cameras should be considered as 1 point AF system. 6D center AF would kick 5D II in the rear in lower light.

[RLPhoto]

You have no FF lenses, which mean's you might as well just sell everything and start new with FF.

1. Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC.
2. Canon 100mm F/2
3. 5D2 or 5D3.

Skip 6D, Not good value for $$$.

I WOULDN'T do that - I would skip 5D II and take 6D for these reasons.

1. Newer camera - with extra features, wifi etc
2. True Auto ISO in "M" mode, 5D II has fixed auto ISO at 400
3. Better AF - more accurate then 5D II

In actual use, the 6D will fail in everything the 5D2 will performance wise and no better than the 5D2 in getting the shot. Same FPS, nearly identical terrible AF, and 98% viewfinder. The 5D3 will have none of these limits.

So why waste those extra 500$? Get another lens. Don't waste it on the fluff from the 6D and that's why I consider it bad value for $$$.

In which way? 6D AF center point is way MUCH BETTER 5D II, so what is your point?

 your still stuck only using the center point. That's the issue.

Are you saying 5D II has better outer AF points then 6D? Both of these cameras should be considered as 1 point AF system. 6D center AF would kick 5D II in the rear in lower light.

I'm saying that the outer AF points on either camera are awful but I've never had a problem with the center AF on the 5Dc or 5D2. What I'm saying is the 6D outer points are still rubbish and virtually no improvement over the 5Dc/5D2

[J.R.]

You have no FF lenses, which mean's you might as well just sell everything and start new with FF.

1. Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC.
2. Canon 100mm F/2
3. 5D2 or 5D3.

Skip 6D, Not good value for $$$.

I WOULDN'T do that - I would skip 5D II and take 6D for these reasons.

1. Newer camera - with extra features, wifi etc
2. True Auto ISO in "M" mode, 5D II has fixed auto ISO at 400
3. Better AF - more accurate then 5D II

In actual use, the 6D will fail in everything the 5D2 will performance wise and no better than the 5D2 in getting the shot. Same FPS, nearly identical terrible AF, and 98% viewfinder. The 5D3 will have none of these limits.

So why waste those extra 500$? Get another lens. Don't waste it on the fluff from the 6D and that's why I consider it bad value for $$$.

In which way? 6D AF center point is way MUCH BETTER 5D II, so what is your point?

 your still stuck only using the center point. That's the issue.

Are you saying 5D II has better outer AF points then 6D? Both of these cameras should be considered as 1 point AF system. 6D center AF would kick 5D II in the rear in lower light.

I'm saying that the outer AF points on either camera are awful but I've never had a problem with the center AF on the 5Dc or 5D2. What I'm saying is the 6D outer points are still rubbish and virtually no improvement over the 5Dc/5D2

I agree on the AF. It's not very different from the 5D2. But would you call the 6D, a zero improvement on the 5d2

[dcren123]

You have no FF lenses, which mean's you might as well just sell everything and start new with FF.

1. Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC.
2. Canon 100mm F/2
3. 5D2 or 5D3.

Skip 6D, Not good value for $$$.

I WOULDN'T do that - I would skip 5D II and take 6D for these reasons.

1. Newer camera - with extra features, wifi etc
2. True Auto ISO in "M" mode, 5D II has fixed auto ISO at 400
3. Better AF - more accurate then 5D II

In actual use, the 6D will fail in everything the 5D2 will performance wise and no better than the 5D2 in getting the shot. Same FPS, nearly identical terrible AF, and 98% viewfinder. The 5D3 will have none of these limits.

So why waste those extra 500$? Get another lens. Don't waste it on the fluff from the 6D and that's why I consider it bad value for $$$.

In which way? 6D AF center point is way MUCH BETTER 5D II, so what is your point?

 your still stuck only using the center point. That's the issue.

Are you saying 5D II has better outer AF points then 6D? Both of these cameras should be considered as 1 point AF system. 6D center AF would kick 5D II in the rear in lower light.

I'm saying that the outer AF points on either camera are awful but I've never had a problem with the center AF on the 5Dc or 5D2. What I'm saying is the 6D outer points are still rubbish and virtually no improvement over the 5Dc/5D2

I hope your statement is based on first hand experience with both the 6D and the 5D2, and not based solely on spec sheets or assumptions and hearsay, since I don't really think it's a good idea to dismiss something based on assumptions or specs without hands-on experience.

[willis]

So we just created a war here between 6D and 5D2 But thanks for all those feedbacks, I'll start figuring my next move to FF.

[bdunbar79]

Look, this is really simple.  Really.  The 5D2 and 6D have equal performing outter AF points.  The 6D's center AF point is better.  The 6D has slightly better DR.  In a strict comparison, yes the 6D has improvements over the 5D2.  Not difficult to understand. 

[Marsu42]

Not difficult to understand.

:-) I guess the difficult part is that the "entry-level" gimmick-loaded 6d has better performance than the venerable pro 5d2 that has been used winning "photographer of the year" awards ... but you're correct, it's simply the way tech evolution works.

Imho the only important reason to buy a new 5d2 over a 6d is that the older model has higher sharpness @low iso, next to the pro-style usability with the joystick which might mixing 6d & 5d3 a hassle.