October 23, 2014, 05:10:54 AM

Author Topic: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII  (Read 107675 times)

DocMo

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2013, 10:43:07 PM »
Here's the thing. Everyone is coming into this thread already knowing that the 5D mark III is the better overall camera. But what I'm also seeing is people who need to justify their purchases again, and that's where all the flaming starts. The truth is, the 6D is a great full frame camera to build on, but it's not that far down below the 5D mark III, especially for normal use. The uneducated folks in this forum seem to use the word "rebelized" (a term which only applies to Americans, really) a lot, and probably never even used a rebel much less a 6D to actually feel and shoot photos with them to know the difference. Another misconception I notice is the justification of the 6D sensor being incrementally better. What is unknown to both DXO and someone who hasn't shot photos with both, is that the difference is barely if not at all seen in real world results. Fact is, the 5D mark III will always produce more keepers in some specific shooting conditions, and IQ is more than just nailing one good photo. IQ is also about nailing good photos all the time. And that's the main reason why people put the 6D down, not throwing into account that the 6D in general purpose will at least do more than half of the 5D mark III's job just as good. I.e if you're a landscape or macro/portrait shooter you will very rarely need the higher AF performance and will make up for it in a big way with its more robust, low noise, full frame sensor. That said, the 6D is doing quite well picking up from where the 5D mark II left off and the 5D mark III is a very good next generation camera.

Very well said.  ;)

In thinking about it, I guess there's really just a few important questions (and these questions will change depending upon your personal use and need). Here's what I think (IMO) are a few of those questions...

1. Can I afford this camera? (And does it offer ME value?)
2. Will I use this camera? (And then, will I use it as the tool it's designed to be utilized as? )
3. Will I be pleased with the results that come from this camera? (Note that this is also a function of understanding your own skill level - lot's of people are perfectly pleased with P&S camera results).
4. If this is related to my work/business, can I make money with this camera's results?
5. And, probably my favorite question, Will I have fun shooting this thing?!

There may be more, but in essence, that's really what's important. I bet a lot of 6D, 5D III, and other model's owners can all answer a resounding YES to those questions. I ask myself these questions for my camera's, my A/V equipment, and my car. Gotta be fun though - that's a deal killer. 
« Last Edit: February 08, 2013, 11:10:20 PM by DocMo »
T4i  :  135 2.0 L  :  70-200 4.0 IS L  :  18-135stm  :  40 2.8stm  :  50 1.8 II  :  55-250 IS II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2013, 10:43:07 PM »

sdsr

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 685
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #31 on: February 09, 2013, 12:08:02 AM »
Just noticed this in your review. You're perpetuating the myth that the 6D has less high ISO noise than the 5D3. This is simply not true. It's an optical illusion. The 6D has less color noise but more grain. Meaning that they actually will have identical levels of noise, as shown by tests, they just require different noise reduction settings. The 5D Mark III is just uglier unprocessed leading people to falsley conclude that it has less noise.


If it's "an optical illusion" that the 6D has less noise, that means that photos taken with the 6D look as though they have less noise.  Since noise is only a problem because of what it looks like, then....

sdsr

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 685
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #32 on: February 09, 2013, 12:25:53 AM »
How do you find the size of the 6D, coming from your 5D MkII? No stores have the 6D in stock where I live. Hoping to visit B&H and get a feel for one when I am in NY next month.

I have the 50D, and I find the ergonomics great. I held a 60D and found it smaller than my liking. Is the 6D closer to either in size, or in between? My other concern is the lack of a joystick! Mostly ergonomic questions, since I am confident in the 6D's image quality.

I get the impression that - as with so many other aspects of 6D comparisons - size differences are probably exaggerated.  I have a 5DII and a 6D (and a Rebel) and the differences in external dimensions between the 5DII and 6D strike me as trivial (I've never so much as touched a 60D, so I can't compare that).  The 5DII is c. a quarter of an inch wider, but in other dimensions the differences are less than that.  They do feel different, though, partly because the 6D is lighter, and partly because its contours are a bit different - they taper differently and the grip on the 6D is deeper but narrower (for me that makes it even easier to carry by the grip than the 5DII).  The 5DIII (I don't own one but have rented it) looks and feels much the same as the 5DII.  Which - if any - feels better is, of course, entirely subjective; I like the feel of all of these FF contestants, but that's just me.

sdsr

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 685
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #33 on: February 09, 2013, 12:51:45 AM »

I thought we didn't like DXO here  :P

Seriously, I'm sure most of us wouldn't be able to tell the difference between them.
[/quote]

That's probably true (and it's also probably true if you toss the Nikon D600 into the mix as well).  And because it's true, and because image quality is ultimately what matters most (well, to some of us, anyway), that says a lot for the 6D.  If the images you end up with look essentially the same (though the 6D's may look slightly better at high ISOs and if you go berserk lightening shadows), the question becomes whether the additional features of the 5DIII are as significant as the difference in price; and whether they are depends on what you shoot and your preferences in doing so.  They aren't for me - the superiority of the 6D's center focus point over the 5DIII's (not to mention the D600's) in very low light is something I often benefit from, whereas the superiority of the 5DIIIs peripheral focus points isn't something I would notice (and even on the 5DIII the focus points are still lumped together in a rather small proportion of the viewfinder).  None of the 5DIII's other advantages matter to me at all.  For others, though, the 5DIII would obviously be the better choice (and if I end up deciding I want to use a camera differently, it might well be better for me, too).  We're lucky to have both to choose from, especially given the quality of the photos the cheaper one lets you make....   

Radiating

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 336
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #34 on: February 09, 2013, 01:20:34 AM »
Just noticed this in your review. You're perpetuating the myth that the 6D has less high ISO noise than the 5D3. This is simply not true. It's an optical illusion. The 6D has less color noise but more grain. Meaning that they actually will have identical levels of noise, as shown by tests, they just require different noise reduction settings. The 5D Mark III is just uglier unprocessed leading people to falsley conclude that it has less noise.


If it's "an optical illusion" that the 6D has less noise, that means that photos taken with the 6D look as though they have less noise.  Since noise is only a problem because of what it looks like, then....

Not really, you can change the appearance of noise using noise reduction, what really matters is the underlying signal to noise ratio, which is all but identical between the two cameras.

ThuiQuaDayNe

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #35 on: February 09, 2013, 01:28:30 AM »
This thread reminds me of  Porsche Boxster vs 911 owners:

Boxster Owner (6D):
1. It's lighter due to use of high grade polymers.
2. More nimble easier to handle
3. It's convertible so I see better, especially in the dark (high ISO)
4. Easier on the wallet, cost less, better value
5. This car fits ME perfectly!  I love it!
6. Most important of them all, I don't need all that features

911 Owner (5D3):
1.  "No comment"

911 Turbo (1DX) Owner:
1. While slapping his hand on the forehead: "Damn rookie, must be his first sports car (aka to FF)"


Robert Welch

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 84
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #36 on: February 09, 2013, 01:41:43 AM »
I have owned the 5D3 since it first came out (got the first one delivered to the local dealer), and recently acquired a 6D as a 2nd camera (well, actually as a 7th camera, as I also have 1D3, 2 @ 7D, 40D & 30D). I appreciate the 5D3 as the best Canon I've owned to date (though I still really love the 1D3, but it's just older tech at this point), but the 6D is an impressive camera, and I can tell that I will enjoy using it very much. I need more time with it to really determine when I will use it most, but there will be times I'll pick it up instead of the 5D3. There is something to be said for it's simplicity and compactness, these are 'features' that, though they are about things that are not there (extra weight & additional controls, etc.), are helpful in increased nimbleness and in some ways improved handling. Sure the 5D3 has more controls and features, but the 6D has a nice consolidation of features and controls that make it an efficient and effective tool for some photographic situations. It's not as versatile as the 5D3, but for a lot of photographers it will be just as effective. I'm not even taking the GPS & WiFi into consideration here, those are additional features that in my mind put an already good camera over the top into the category of excellent camera. Really, there are only a few features that I find make the 5D3 a truly superior camera, and at a $1k premium, it is debatable which is the better buy. It depends on if things like the AF flexibility and dual cards are worth the extra money for you. Beyond those two features, I find it largely a toss up between the two cameras, as the other differences are rather minor.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #36 on: February 09, 2013, 01:41:43 AM »

serendipidy

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1324
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #37 on: February 09, 2013, 01:50:28 AM »
This thread reminds me of  Porsche Boxster vs 911 owners:

Boxster Owner (6D):
1. It's lighter due to use of high grade polymers.
2. More nimble easier to handle
3. It's convertible so I see better, especially in the dark (high ISO)
4. Easier on the wallet, cost less, better value
5. This car fits ME perfectly!  I love it!
6. Most important of them all, I don't need all that features

911 Owner (5D3):
1.  "No comment"

911 Turbo (1DX) Owner:
1. While slapping his hand on the forehead: "Damn rookie, must be his first sports car (aka to FF)"



LOL...clever analogy :)
EOS 5D miii, EOS 7D, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS ii, 100-400mmL IS

kbmelb

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 131
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #38 on: February 09, 2013, 02:05:35 AM »
The 6D sounds like a great camera and that is a great review, but I prefer the 5D3 for the AF points, larger body, dual cards, multi controller joystick (especially on the grip) and most ergonomics in general.

As far as the center focal point, I can't remember the last time I used the center focal point. The 5D3 with all the those cross types spread out is really sweet.

There's really only one thing I'm envious of on the 6D and that is built in wifi. I have to use and Eye-Fi card for that.
I've never really run into a situation where the 1/2 DR would have made a difference. Therefore the banding issues of the 5D3 aren't an issue either. During test I do know the banding is considerably better than the 5D2.

Good points, and I do think that the 5D3 is perhaps the best all around camera available.  I suspect that most 5D3 users are quite happy with their purchase.  I also think, however, that most 6D users will be happy with their purchase and will discover that they got far more camera than what most people have written the 6D off to be.

No doubt. I considered a 6D when I upgraded my second camera. Unfortunately though I shoot a lot in a lot of dark club environments with colored LED lights. So I am usually underexposing backgrounds and need the flash to fire dead on every time. While doing this I am almost always using the outer AF points with spot metering. Since the 1Dx (would love to have) was well out of my range I chose to go with a 1Ds3. I picked it up for close to the $$ of a 6D. It is perfect since I'm underexposing backgrounds I'm usually under ISO 1600. For years a 1Ds2 was my go to in these environments (since the 5D2's AF and metering were so bad) so the mk3 is really kicking it.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 02:07:55 AM by kbmelb »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #39 on: February 09, 2013, 02:34:41 AM »
But I want to be a 911 GT3 RS owner, which camera do I choose?  All of them, since I have loads of disposable income?  A fireproof one to go along with my fireproof race suit?  ::)

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1979
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #40 on: February 09, 2013, 03:17:34 AM »
6D ? 5D Mkiii ?

Blah - they're both toys compared with a 1Dx.

pedro

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 780
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #41 on: February 09, 2013, 03:21:14 AM »
The 6D sounds like a great camera and that is a great review, but I prefer the 5D3 for the AF points, larger body, dual cards, multi controller joystick (especially on the grip) and most ergonomics in general.

As far as the center focal point, I can't remember the last time I used the center focal point. The 5D3 with all the those cross types spread out is really sweet.

There's really only one thing I'm envious of on the 6D and that is built in wifi. I have to use and Eye-Fi card for that.
I've never really run into a situation where the 1/2 DR would have made a difference. Therefore the banding issues of the 5D3 aren't an issue either. During test I do know the banding is considerably better than the 5D2.

Good points, and I do think that the 5D3 is perhaps the best all around camera available.  I suspect that most 5D3 users are quite happy with their purchase.  I also think, however, that most 6D users will be happy with their purchase and will discover that they got far more camera than what most people have written the 6D off to be.

I purchased the 5D3 last August. Still paid the premium, but as it was a brick and mortar store I didn't mind to support them. Coming from a 30D it was worth even that. Definitely saving up for a 16-35 instead of waiting for the 14-24 fantomas ;-) Just tested the 5D3 one night this week with the 50 f/1.4 wide open @ ISO 20k out in a soft snow storm. AF (I am using center point only) was incredibely snappy and accurate. Although lights were blurred a bit due to aperture. In comparison to a 30D the high ISOs are all I ever dreamed of. And I dare to say at its price tag it is the most versatile all round cam for serious amateurs and pro's who do not go for the 1Dx.As a high ISO geek I would have liked it to have the same MP count as the 6D or even as low as the 1Dx. But Canon won't eat into their PJ flagship. Recently took a picture of my cat at ISO 51k in an almost dark room:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guatitamasluz/8370478680/#in/photostream
and here's another low light pic at ISO 25k
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guatitamasluz/8418826633/#in/photostream
No NR applied.
The 6D might even slightly surpass these in IQ due to the lower MP count and a new sensor.  8)
Cheers, Pedro.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 03:37:25 AM by pedro »
30D, EF-S 10-22/ 5DIII, 16-35 F/2.8 L USM II, 28 F/2.8, 50 F/1.4, 85 F/1.8, 70-200 F/2.8 classic,
join me at http://www.flickr.com/groups/insane_isos/

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #42 on: February 09, 2013, 03:29:35 AM »
Dustin, not read your review yet, but I will.

On lenses, have you ever tried the Tokina 16-28 f/2.8?  In case you're not familiar, it's a full frame lens. 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #42 on: February 09, 2013, 03:29:35 AM »

pedro

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 780
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #43 on: February 09, 2013, 03:42:46 AM »
CarlTN, Dustin: Here's a review of it at photozone.de (german site in english)
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/595-tokina162828eosff

To make it short, here are their conclusions:

Verdict

The Tokina AF 16-28mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro SD FX is a high-performance ultra-wide zoom lens that gives the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 USM L II a run for the money - but it's not a lens without flaws. Its primary weakness is corner softness at f/2.8 but that's not unheard of in this class anyway. However, the center quality is great and the borders are generally sharp as well. The corners start to catch up at f/4 and they're very good from f/5.6 onward. Vignetting is, of course, visible at f/2.8, specifically at 16mm but the issue is better controlled than average. Lateral CAs, an old Tokina disease actually, are modest and not overly field-relevant when stopped down a little bit. Typical for such lens it shows some barrel distortions but they're, again, comparatively moderate even at the very wide end of the range. Technically the Tokina is superior to the current Canon EF zoom lenses in basically all the analysed image aspects!

Unfortunately there may be a hair spoiling the (optical) soup here - quality control. As mentioned we purchased three lens samples for testing, two in Nikon and one in Canon mount, and all three showed some centering issues. The initial Nikon variant was so poor that we had to cancel the testing procedure. We'd like to urge the manufacturers to take lens centering (alignment) more seriously - just a good or possibly even great base-design is simply not enough without proper manufacturing. We are pretty sure that consumers, especially in the mid-to-high end market, would be happily willing to pay a little more for better quality control. Especially ultra-wide and standard lenses show more outliers than desirable - not only among Tokinas but across the manufacturers (e.g. recently we tested 3 (three!) Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 in Nikon mount without success). We are probably seeing negative outliers in excess of 25%(!) in this segment which is, frankly, embarrassing and unacceptable!

That all said we'd like to end this review with some more positive aspects. The (outer) build quality of the Tokina is on a very high level. The lens body is only based on tightly assembled, high quality plastics rather than the "duraluminium" finish used in previous AT-X lenses. However, the quality is still up to pro standards with the exception of the missing weather sealing. Tokina has improved the AF quite a bit - it doesn't really operate "silently" as promised but it's both fast and accurate in phase-detection AF mode. Some users may not like the huge, bulb-like front element which prohibits the use of front filters. However, it seems as if only this design approach solves the performance issues that are usually associated with ultra-wide angle lenses. So setting aside potential sample variations the Tokina is definitely worth a deeper look!
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 03:48:10 AM by pedro »
30D, EF-S 10-22/ 5DIII, 16-35 F/2.8 L USM II, 28 F/2.8, 50 F/1.4, 85 F/1.8, 70-200 F/2.8 classic,
join me at http://www.flickr.com/groups/insane_isos/

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #44 on: February 09, 2013, 04:12:40 AM »
Dustin, not trying to hijack your thread, honest!  I just want to reply to Pedro, and elaborate a bit.

Pedro, thanks very much!  I do like Photozone a lot.  I presume you own the Tokina? 

Photozone's review convinced me to try the (Cosina) Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 (Nikon mount), about a year and a half ago.  I bought a Canon adapter, and couldn't be happier (the adaptor's fit is of lesser quality but I made it work).  I seriously think it is the sharpest 50mm lens in existence, although it has very noticeable longitudinal CA (bokeh fringing) at the wider f/stop end (which would likely count against its ultimate sharpness for many...not so much for me because I see what I see at 100% on the screen).  Lateral CA is minimal, however. 

I just can't believe how sharp it is on my crop camera.  I believe it's significantly sharper than the 85 f/1.2L toward the wider end (I rented one once), and falls to almost as sharp by f/5.6 (which is saying something).  It retains the sharpness to the extreme corners...wide open (again, on my crop camera).  The Voigtlander also has no vignetting on the crop camera, wide open (I'm sure it has some on a full frame).  By stark contrast, the 85 f1/.2, had very severe vignetting wider than f/2, on my crop camera.  The adapter has a focus-confirm chip, it lights up my AF, and not only does it work...but it's as accurate as it could be (a lot more accurate than my eye/viewfinder interface is).

The fit, feel, and metal finish, seem close if not identical to Zeiss.  Zeiss are also made in Japan now, or at least the ones I've rented are (most of you probably know this, just stating it for clarification).

I have no idea if it is as sharp as the new Canon 24-70 f/2.8 ii zoom, at 50mm.  (The Voigtlander is spec'd at 58mm, but in reality I think it's more like 54mm.  It also effectively magnifies the image a lot at the closest focus distance, so it's more like a 65mm up close.)  One thing is certain: No one in the world would ever test and compare them, and even if they did, they would never admit the Voigtlander has similar sharpness.  (I mention the Canon zoom because recently it has been tested to exceed the sharpness of the Zeiss 50mm f/2 Makro Planar...which previously was supposedly the sharpest 50mm lens.)  If this Voigtlander had Canon's name on it and a red stripe, then maybe it would get compared in an honest way.

As for the bokeh, no it isn't perfect, a bit far from it.  But it's also quite good...a bit of the ring-highlight effect, not all that noticable usually.  It wouldn't compare to the 50 mm f/1.2L, but then, what does?  Certainly the 50 1.2 is about as sharp as a baby's bottom...as in...it's soft.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 04:32:07 AM by CarlTN »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I Chose a Canon EOS 6D over a 5D MKIII
« Reply #44 on: February 09, 2013, 04:12:40 AM »