6D or 5D Mk II

[cocopop05]

,I just learned the price is $2100. If I were buying my first DSLR I would think Canon are mad and go for the D600.  For those that may label me a Nikon fanboy, I have just ordered a Canon 5D Mark III.

[ronderick]

I'd say the 6D is for those that are contemplating stepping into the realm of FF bodies but are hesitating because the 5D2 is 4 years old.

The 5D2 is where it is, so for those who already own a 5D2, I doubt there's any real substantial reason to upgrade to a 6D (unless you damaged your camera to a point that it's worth the money).

However, I'm pretty sure there's going to be a group of people who is waiting to hunt for a better deal on a brand new 5D2 following the introduction of the 6D.

[benherman]

5dii might be cheaper while stock lasts, too similar cameras, pick cheap one I reckon. I'm hoping 5diii comes down in price more before I update my 5dii, but might look at 1dx too coz its cheap for top of the line camera.

[Ricku]

For those that may label me a Nikon fanboy..

Ignore them. It is they who are the true fanboys.

[steliosk]

Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

So you'll be using the old focus and recompose technique, no matter which camera you pick.

If I were you, I'd abandon ship and go for the D600. Looks like a much much better camera.

+1

[tron]

I have a nice 5DMkII. I would be stupid to swap it for a 6D. Now if someone starts from scratch I guess it could be a 50/50 decision. Personally, I would still choose between a 5D MkII or 5DMkIII (when the price comes down a little).

[Jotho]

So Ricku, can you please elaborate on that? What makes you draw to that conclusion? Specs only?

Nicku, next thing for you now is to abandon this forum and go to the Nikon forum instead then.

So, now this forum is only for Canon-loving fanboys, eh?

No, but as any internet forum it is very delicate. People often throw out unsubstantiated opinions for reasons beyond my understanding. Let's keep an adult discussion going instead. Canon will have their reasons for developing and launching the products they do. In my view, Nikon is not leading Canon in the market, if they or you have a different opinion, there are nicer ways to express that. But really, I don't care much who's leading who, I am happy with the stuff I use and it suits my purposes.

[Marsu42]

I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better?

You cannot pick up the 6d, it doesn't exist yet. And just that Canon states "December" doesn't mean anything knowing their release schedule problems, the "newly developed sensor" might very well produce a delay.

I'd wait for real life ISO performance and comparison of the AF systems, otherwise the two cameras appear quite comparable. No mention of AFMA on 6D, which may be an issue on FF sensors

6d has afma (and silent shutter, gps, wifi over the 5d2).

Well it is now confirmed that the 6D has 11 point AF with only one cross type point.

Actually Canon specs implies that the 6d has *no* cross sensor at all if you're using a f2.8 lens - if this is correct it would be arrogant beyond belief and a measure to protect the "pro" 5d3 at all costs.

[Albi86]

Actually Canon specs implies that the 6d has *no* cross sensor at all if you're using a f2.8 lens - if this is correct it would be arrogant beyond belief and a measure to protect the "pro" 5d3 at all costs.

Found this:

A cross-type sensor with an f/2.8-sensitive horizontal line and an f/5.6-sensitive vertical line will function as a cross-type sensor with an f/2.8 or faster lens, but if you use a slower lens, you'll still have a functional AF point (but with only single-line orientation).

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-EOS-DSLR-Autofocus-Explained.aspx

[7enderbender]

I'm considering picking up either the 6D or 5D Mk II, which camera would you expect to be better? How many 5D Mk II owners would swap their camera for the 6D? Are there any advantages the 5D Mk II holds over the 6D?

Obviously, I haven't seen the 6D yet and all of this is a matter of personal preferences anyway. But from the specs I haven't seen anything whatsoever that would get me interested in the 6D. So without seeing it I would chose the 5DII any day over a smaller camera that loses out on a few important points: shutter speed, viewfinder coverage, sync speed - without offering anything really useful in return. And all that at a (currently) higher price? Nah, I wouldn't consider for second swapping my 5DII. In fact, if I had extra cash right now I'd be looking to pick up a second body and store it away. It pretty much does everything I need it to do which I haven't seen a reason yet to swap it for a MarkIII (though that one is really really nice).

[Musouka]

Also I do not understand why Canon can release a camera today that is USB2, non-UHS SD and has such an antiquated autofocus system.

Let us not distort the facts. Canon's literature says that UHS-I is supported.

For FF cameras of similar form factor, only the Nikon D800 has USB3. Sony A99, Nikon D600 and Canon's offerings all have USB2.

I guess there are no good excuses for the lackluster AF module.

[bdunbar79]

I have a nice 5DMkII. I would be stupid to swap it for a 6D. Now if someone starts from scratch I guess it could be a 50/50 decision. Personally, I would still choose between a 5D MkII or 5DMkIII (when the price comes down a little).

I agree here.  I don't think the 6D is for 5D Mark II owners.  I suppose the upgrade for 5D Mark II owners was intended to be the Mark III or maybe some other high MP camera down the road.  The 6D I feel is for those who are entering FF for the first time.  Can you compare which is better?  Well, I don't know, maybe the 6D with a Digic 5+ vs. the 5D Mark II's Digic 4.  It's hard to say.  This is the same exact scenario when the 7D was released, if you had a 50D you probably weren't going to get a 7D b/c the differences weren't enough.  Same with the 5D2 and 6D.  I think this camera is just a 2012 version of the 2008 5D Mark II, simply a 5D2 with a Digic 5+.  The improvements are probably marginal between those two, however, maybe significant from users going to FF for the first time. 

[infared]

I have a nice 5DMkII. I would be stupid to swap it for a 6D. Now if someone starts from scratch I guess it could be a 50/50 decision. Personally, I would still choose between a 5D MkII or 5DMkIII (when the price comes down a little).

I agree here.  I don't think the 6D is for 5D Mark II owners.  I suppose the upgrade for 5D Mark II owners was intended to be the Mark III or maybe some other high MP camera down the road.  The 6D I feel is for those who are entering FF for the first time.  Can you compare which is better?  Well, I don't know, maybe the 6D with a Digic 5+ vs. the 5D Mark II's Digic 4.  It's hard to say.  This is the same exact scenario when the 7D was released, if you had a 50D you probably weren't going to get a 7D b/c the differences weren't enough.  Same with the 5D2 and 6D.  I think this camera is just a 2012 version of the 2008 5D Mark II, simply a 5D2 with a Digic 5+.  The improvements are probably marginal between those two, however, maybe significant from users going to FF for the first time.

I agree with all your comments AND to take this a step further (I am a 5DII owner who wincingly upgraded to a 5DIII)....I think if you upgraded(?) to the 6D from a 7D (hmmm...that somehow is so telling) you would be greatly disappointed in the 6D after being used to an incredible auto focus system, way faster frame rate, etc. The performance would be lacking. Not to mention selling off your lenses and starting from scratch. 
So I think this camera is more for customers who what to get into full frame but are coming from a few notches down in the pecking order or are completely new.
I have to say, after using the autofocus and extended bracketing capabilities (my main reason for shelling out all of that cash!) of the 5DIII, it would be painful to go back to a 5DII or a 6D.  The 5DIII is incredible from my viewpoint, but at a very dear cost to this photographer. I do not care that the 5DIII does not have GPS or Wifi...but for the price it certainly should!!!!! LOL!
From an over view, without comparing all 4 cameras (6D, 7D, 5DII and 5DIII) are all incredible image-making devices. They are all "There-There" for creating great photographs in capable hands.

[seacritter]

I have a 5D Mark II.  I bought it a few months ago for $1500 on craigslist.  After owning it for a short time, I now know that I should have made that purchase years ago.  I have a considerable amount of money tied up in "L" lenses.  I've always spent the money on glass first.  That being said...

If I were upgrading from anything less than FF, and could afford it, I'd probably go for the new technology.  The 6D has Digic 5+, built in Wifi, silent shutter mode, GPS and a smartphone app.  That alone would sway me towards the 6D.  Though, imagine the used price market on the Mark II when the 6D hits.  It would be very affordable to pick up a nice used Mark II for backup or whatever.

So, in the end, you can't go wrong with either choice.  I absolutely enjoy my Mark II.  This is a total win-win...

Scott

[aznable]

This is the same exact scenario when the 7D was released, if you had a 50D you probably weren't going to get a 7D b/c the differences weren't enough. 

100% coverage, 3more megapixels, 10 af points more and the rest of AF trhat put the on in 50 is shame, 2 more fps.

quite differente here...it'ìs for new customers