Who really is the target demographic for the 6D?

[ahsanford]

It's just another price point being offered by Canon. The 5DII will be soon discontinued leaving this as their 2k model.

I seriously dont understand all the angry/ complaining posts- every camera model that is released isn't intended to be sold to every Canon user. If it is not for you, move on.

+1 on both points.  Dead on.

[DB]

As a 7D shooter I would not opt for the 6D but would rather wait and save up for a 5D mark III. But the market for xxD and xxxD is very different, in that it is populated 50:50 between photographers:videographers. These are camera owners who will put L glass on a T2i/550D and shoot videos (I had a T2i with 24-70 and 70-200 L lenses) as well as fast primes. They want to go FF primarily because their shutter speed and aperture values are manually preset when shooting video, so using the 'photographic triangle' (for exposure purposes) only ISO remains. This is where the 6D comes in, with usable 12,800 ISO. These people can now film indoors.

Secondly, as others have correctly pointed out, Canon makes a lot of money selling lenses (this past August, they sold their 80 millionth lens, having only passed the 40 millionth in April 2008 - so you see they now sell a lot more lenses than camera bodies). By getting 60D/T2i/T3i/T4i owners to sell their existing gear and trade-up to the FF 6D, Canon will achieve 2 distinct objectives (1) expand the universe of potential EF & EF-S purchasers (as there will be more DSLR shooters), and (2) encourage those new 6D owners to buy some more EF glass.

So, to cut to the chase, the target demographic is the xxD/xxxD shooter who likes to take landscape/travel photos and/or shoot HD video. Undoubtedly these are the people that Canon Inc. is targeting with this new DSLR

Finally, as an additional boon to Canon, by pricing this new camera above two thousand dollars, they also achieve a 3rd objective - they've persuaded many other xD owners (5Dc/5D2/7D) who are considering upgrading their body to bite the bullet and pay up for a new 5D mark III.

[x-vision]

But what do you folks think?  Who is this really aimed at?

If you think about it, this camera is really for those who were buying the 5DII as a point-and-shoot camera.

These buyers don't need a better AF system, since they are using a slow kit lens anyway (the 24-105 F4/L).
Everything else in the camera has been simplified too, thus making it easy to use for amateurs.

So, although marketed as an 'enthusiast' camera, the 6D is really an expensive amateur camera, appealing mostly to well-heeled amateurs. 

Enthusiasts are of course rightfully disappointed because of the basic specs.

Canon obviously thinks that well-heeled amateurs outnumber enthusiasts.
If they are right, then the 6D will be successful, regardless that it's priced the same as the better spec'd D600.

Only time will tell if Canon is right.

I think, though, that Canon is misjudging the 6D market the same way they've misjudged the 60D market.
The 6D will have a tepid reception and sales will pickup only after the price drops to say $1600-1700.
At this price all that would matter is that it's a FF shooter with a native EF lens mount.
The shortcomings of the camera would be easily forgiven. 

[distant.star]

.
I don't know who it's for, but I sure know who it is NOT  for.

This was not designed to appeal to photographers. This is for people who want to take a few pictures once in a while.

And the ultra-dark capable AF is because once buyers realize what the have they will only use it at night when there is not as much chance of being embarrassed.

[unfocused]

I'm amused by people who say Canon didn't listen to their customers because it is not the camera they wanted. The problem is that Canon did listen to their customers and you just weren't typical of their customers.

Face it, Canon did extensive market research to determine what features people wanted and what features would sell more cameras and what features wouldn't. If there is a feature you wanted that is missing, it's not because Canon wasn't listening to customers, it is because your wants are not shared by others.

I think the OP probably had a lot of things right. I would add that I can see it as an appealing second body for many users. At this point, I'm interested in a second body. When the 7DII comes out, I'll compare it to the 6D and decide which to go for. If the 7D is only a marginal upgrade, I may consider this. If the 7D improves on the things I want it to improve on, I'll go that route.

The autofocus is not a major concern of mine, because the 7D is better suited for subjects where I need good autofocus. If I have the time to compose a shot carefully, a single autofocus point is sufficient. With the 6D's slow frame rate and 60% less focal length, I wouldn't be using it for action shots anyway.

It will be an individual decision for every customer, but the beauty of modern research methods is they can take thousands of those individual opinions, aggregate them and then design a product that meets enough needs to sell.

It's funny, everyone says they want to be an individual, but if you tell someone that no one else shares their taste, they feel left out.

[dr croubie]

If it were taken on its own, it should be equal to the 7D.
Give up a bit of sealing, build quality and AF, and in return you get a shiny new FF sensor.

But, the 5D2 exists at a lower price-point, both new and used. The D600 also exists, it's a hell of a lot more camera for really not much more money.

You will buy the 6D over D600 if:
- You have a lot of EF lenses and don't have the cash/inclination to jump ship (like me).

- You have some sort of 'subconscious brand loyalty' and just won't touch Nikon with a barge-pole, for no rational reason (my sister chose between the 550/600/60D, I asked if she was considering Nikon and she just said "ugh" with no qualifier).

- Or you have a rational reason for not touching Nikon (like the 'colour', TS-E or f/1.2 lenses with no F-mount equivalent, DPP being free, etc)


And you will buy the 6D over 5D2 if:
- You're a rebel/otherwise user with a lot of cash invested in SD cards (not me).

- You're a child of FB/twitter who really has no privacy concerns about tracking your every movement and location with GPS, and actually actively want to do so (not me).

- You don't know what you want, and let a salesman tell you that a $2100 camera with a $400 lens will take better photos than an $800 camera with $1700 worth of lenses.

- Above all, you have a phobia of buying a second-hand 5D mk2, even if you can get one in perfect condition (or even new) for a lot less than the 6D new (my mum always had a saying, "never buy second-hand, you're buying someone else's problems", she never believed anyone would sell something if it still worked fine) (not me).

[spinworkxroy]

I don't think it will appeal to "first" time buyers who want to turn "pro"..I believe they'd rather go for the 5D3 instead.
I doubt canon wanted the 6D in the "pro" market and compete with the 5D3 anyways.

But yes, it will appeal to 60D owners since the button layout is almost identical and the scroll wheel will be VERY familiar to 60D owners. It's basically a FF 60D if you ask me.

Will I be getting the 6D? Most likely yes, but not entirely for me. It'll make a good backup cam for sure.
Currently I use the 5D3 and i do mainly portraits and it's a hassle changing lenses sometimes and my backup now IS the 60D which i never use anymore as the backup…my wife uses it.

With the 6D, i can sell away all the APS-C lenses and we can share glass now and i already intend to use the 50mm on the 6D and the 85mm on the 5D3 so i don't have to change glass, just change cams.

So yea, i always wanted a cheaper FF that i will want as a backup and that my wife can use as well and i can't afford 2x 5d3...

[Peter C Photography]

this past August, they sold their 80 millionth lens, having only passed the 40 millionth in April 2008

I can't get over this stat.  This ramp is unreal.  Very impressive

[ahsanford]

If it were taken on its own, it should be equal to the 7D.
Give up a bit of sealing, build quality and AF, and in return you get a shiny new FF sensor.

But, the 5D2 exists at a lower price-point, both new and used. The D600 also exists, it's a hell of a lot more camera for really not much more money.

You will buy the 6D over D600 if:
- You have a lot of EF lenses and don't have the cash/inclination to jump ship (like me).

- You have some sort of 'subconscious brand loyalty' and just won't touch Nikon with a barge-pole, for no rational reason (my sister chose between the 550/600/60D, I asked if she was considering Nikon and she just said "ugh" with no qualifier).

- Or you have a rational reason for not touching Nikon (like the 'colour', TS-E or f/1.2 lenses with no F-mount equivalent, DPP being free, etc)


And you will buy the 6D over 5D2 if:
- You're a rebel/otherwise user with a lot of cash invested in SD cards (not me).

- You're a child of FB/twitter who really has no privacy concerns about tracking your every movement and location with GPS, and actually actively want to do so (not me).

- You don't know what you want, and let a salesman tell you that a $2100 camera with a $400 lens will take better photos than an $800 camera with $1700 worth of lenses.

- Above all, you have a phobia of buying a second-hand 5D mk2, even if you can get one in perfect condition (or even new) for a lot less than the 6D new (my mum always had a saying, "never buy second-hand, you're buying someone else's problems", she never believed anyone would sell something if it still worked fine) (not me).

Fantastic commentary.  Great perspective.

Nowhere in this thread did I consider that a 6D might be someone's first Canon, or first SLR for that matter.

In that case, for once, it truly is a direct Canon v. Nikon 'what is better' argument.  (I usually dismiss that nonsense as fanboy hubris, as anyone with at least 3 lenses isn't going to jump ship without a whale of a better product on the other side.)

So in that light -- just for new SLR buyers -- it would appear:

D600's better AF + a few more MP + more feature/creature comforts (headphone jack, pop-up flash, dual cards, etc.) should trump the 6D's GPS + Wifi.... right?

Canon must have some compelling data that says that we gearheads want horsepower and lots of little features, but new SLR users really want convenience.  If so, I think Wifi is dead on for that unmet need.

[ahsanford]

With the 6D, i can sell away all the APS-C lenses and we can share glass now and i already intend to use the 50mm on the 6D and the 85mm on the 5D3 so i don't have to change glass, just change cams.

+1.  Another good comment.  If your backup body is APS-C, you very well may have nontrivial EF-S glass, possibly the 17-55 or 10-22, which are not cheap investments.  Moving entirely to FF frees up $$$ by selling glass.

Again, never thought of that.  Great stuff.

[DB]

this past August, they sold their 80 millionth lens, having only passed the 40 millionth in April 2008

I can't get over this stat.  This ramp is unreal.  Very impressive

The recent exponential growth is similar for DSLR bodies as well, with projections of 18 to 20 million interchangeable lens cameras to be sold during 2012, with another 100 million fixed-lens digital cameras (compacts etc.) also expected to be sold. Notwithstanding all of these mega numbers, of the 7 billion inhabitants of planet Earth, probably only 1-in-20 people own a serious camera ( < 5% and by serious I'm including basic Rebels like Canon's EOS 1100D and higher spec DSLR's) as distinct from camera-phones. So there still exists tremendous growth potential.

[SJTstudios]

The 6d is an introduction to full frame for enthusiasts. people with a simple rebel who like portrait and landscapes can get simple features. You get good iso performance and full frame. You shouldn't need fast shutter speed or "the best focusing if you are going full frame. If so, you should go for a 1dx or 5d iii. It also gives them a chance to try wifi and gps without spending the money. This will get people buying either the 7d or the 6d. Then they will upgrade to the 5d iii or the 1dx, or the new 3d at a later time. Then they will by the wifi or gps accessories.

But, canon is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes on this one. When the "3d" comes out, pros will replace the 5d iii with that, and use the 1dx for speed there will be a lot of cheap well maintained used 5d iii is and the price will drop. Everyone with the 6d will try and upgrade. The 6d will be worth less, and amateurs with a rebel will get the 6d, so even if no one buys this now, it will sell eventually. Canon wants to have everyone jump up on full frame, and then spend money on the gps unit, wifi unit, and more l glass.

So in the final analysis, you could get screwed if you buy this, but if you're an enthusiast who wants full frame, is trying to start their own buissiness, or wants to see if this is the industry they want to try and become a pro in, this isn't such a bad camera. Plus, you could always buy a 1d mark ii, mark iii, or 50d to get the speed and focusing.

[emag]

I would at least consider it.  High ISO and FF image quality is right up this astrophotographer's alley.  My modified 40D and vanilla 60D both mate to EF lenses, I've hesitated to buy EF-S mainly because I always expected to eventually go full frame.  As an added bonus, both accept EOS Clip filters, something I'd miss with FF.  I will, however, wait for a price drop.

[Peter C Photography]

this past August, they sold their 80 millionth lens, having only passed the 40 millionth in April 2008

I can't get over this stat.  This ramp is unreal.  Very impressive

The recent exponential growth is similar for DSLR bodies as well, with projections of 18 to 20 million interchangeable lens cameras to be sold during 2012, with another 100 million fixed-lens digital cameras (compacts etc.) also expected to be sold. Notwithstanding all of these mega numbers, of the 7 billion inhabitants of planet Earth, probably only 1-in-20 people own a serious camera ( < 5% and by serious I'm including basic Rebels like Canon's EOS 1100D and higher spec DSLR's) as distinct from camera-phones. So there still exists tremendous growth potential.

Unreal but I believe it.  Shift to digital has made photography so much more accessible for so many and I'm sure that feeling of accessibility will only increase as technology continues to advance.  Hopefully the ability to sell more and more high end products will mean that more companies like Canon will be dumping more and more into R&D to race ahead of the competition and we'll all reap the benefits (at a price of course).

[ahsanford]

My modified 40D and vanilla 60D both mate to EF lenses, I've hesitated to buy EF-S mainly because I always expected to eventually go full frame.

Oh snap, I didn't think of that, either. 

Other than the very small sliver of higher-end users that prefer APS-C for what they do (see my prior comments on birders and sports guys), won't the folks more likely to buy higher end glass also be the folks likely to go FF?  Ergo, is the 6D the beginning of the end for relatively high-end EF-S glass like the EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS or the EF-S 10-22?