Who really is the target demographic for the 6D?

[ronderick]

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?

That's a pretty hard question to answer, but I think the importance of the 6D would be that it will be the point for Canon's to show hands on its final stance for APS-C bodies/lenses.

With the introduction of the 6D, entry level FF under 2,000 is now a viable market. It will be interesting to see if Canon continues with manufacturing Rebel/XXD for the casual users who wants a DSLR body (which means the EF-S will continue to prosper) or whether they'll try to "shift" this market into the EOS M world (meaning goodbye EF-S, hello EF-M mounts).

My bet would be that EF-M would emerge as the winner, since the EOS-M already offers mount adapters for the bigger lenses (so those with investment in EF-S lenses could still use them) and includes the same APS-C sensors.

Now, Canon seems confident enough they can produce EF-M lenses that are way smaller than their EF-S cousins but still offers the same quality (such as the EF-S 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS II). Whether they can make a smaller version of the top EF-S lens, it still remains to be seen.

By the time they produce the EF-M 10-22, it'll probably be clear to everyone that the days of EF-S lenses is coming to a close.

[daniela]

Isn't obvious?  Its intended to fall between the 7D and the 5D.  Its a upgrade for the 60D users or even 7D owners.  Its a low cost entry level FF.
Wealthy buyers will get a M9, they don't go for low end models.

Fair, but a number of 7D users choose it not because they can't afford FF, but because they want the best APS-C SLR they can buy:

1) They won't have to lug as large/expensive of a lens for a given target, or if they want their long glass to go 1.6x longer, it can.
2) They want a working AF system!  The 7D AF is widely considered better than the 5D2 (and by extension, one would think this new 6D as well).
3) Is there another recent 8 FPS Canon DSLR under $2k?  I'm not aware of one.
4) For some folks, the IQ that FF brings is secondary to just getting the shot.

Birders and sports guys are awfully fond of their 7D cameras from what I'm told.  This shouldn't get them flipping over to FF, IMHO, as that may be the last thing they want to do.

Agree to that

[brianleighty]

.
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.

I'm sure I could take some great pictures with this camera. Just like I do with my 5d mark ii. There'll be plenty of PHOTOGRAPHERS taking great pictures with this camera.

[Fishnose]

Fair, but a number of 7D users choose it not because they can't afford FF, but because they want the best APS-C SLR they can buy

May have been true 3 years ago (but probably not) - the 7D is old technology now. Almost stone age.
Nikon D7000 and Pentax K5 are waaaay ahead.

[Ewinter]

It's aimed at people like me.
It could be aimed at people who are just starting out a photography career as a pro.
For example; I have one camera, the 7d.
Currently, it's in repair.
No camera= no money. I'm looking to upgrade, the 7d iq in studio is not so good. My choices run to:
a) sell the 7d and get a 5dIII. If that's in for repair, end up with no camera and no money again.
Also, I can't get CPS with only one body.
b) get a 5dII, have less IQ from an ISO perspective, and then pay more £££ for the WiFi grip, but qualify for CPS and have a backup camera
c) get a 6d. Wifi's built in; another extra I don't have to buy. It's DIGIC 5+, which means better ISO performance. It'll nicely complement my 7d for when I need to use two cameras. I'll have  a backup, and support for wireless flash if I need it.
I'm betting I'll qualify for CPS with a 6d, too, and all the EF glass I stocked up on will behave like it was really designed to.

I'd be mad to get a 5dII, or even a 5dIII.

[netsuso]

Although many of you have complained about this new Canon DSLR model, I will explain my point of view, as I could be a great example of the 6D target:

- I come from a 550d (T2i) and I'd like to switch to full frame but without spending too much money, so Canon 6D seems like a reasonable option

- I don't give a S___ about the number and type of AF points. I almost exclusively use the center point right now, so having 9, 11, 39, or 61 AF points makes no difference to me. I understand they are very important for some type of photography, but for me one AF point is enough for 99.5% of my photos (and please, that doesn't mean I use my camera as a point and shoot, and I never use auto modes, maybe I'm not an "enthusiast" as some people here have described them, but I am not stupid)

- I _love_ that Canon 6d uses SD cards. I own plenty SD cards from plenty of devices (not only cameras), while my most recent CF card is 256 MB and 9 years old...

- 20 Mp is more than enough for me. I would have liked 22 Mp so 1080p video could be resized from the sensor size with a /3 factor, but anyway 22-24 Mp is something I don't need in my photos.

- We are still pending of some decent reviews, but on paper Canon 6d is much better than D600 for low light photography, both for high ISO and -3 EV AF. And 70% of my photos are indoor, so this is a strong reason for me to prefer 6d over D600

- What I would have liked? Pop-up flash and 100% viewfinder coverage, but no camera is perfect... I can live without that.

- What else I don't bother about? GPS and Wifi, although my mind is changing after seeing the Smartphone remote controller for 6d... I will certainly make use of it

So, am I the perfect buyer? Not yet... I think $2100 (which will be absurdly translated to 2100-2200€ in Europe) is still too much, but I'm assuming a price of $1700-1800 in a few months, and I can wait for that

[DB]

The Canon 6D is available to order for early-December delivery in Ireland for €2199 (approx. $2880), which is still 2x the price of a T4i/650D and almost 3x the cost of a T3i/600D, so it is a bit of a financial stretch for a Rebel owner

[psolberg]

no idea who this camera is for. neither do most people
http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/17/3346366/canon-6d-video-pictures-preview/in/3109719

[Waterloo]

I think it was intended for the Rebel upgraders. Problem is all the Rebel owners I know (and some with 7Ds) wouldn't know the difference between a full frame camera and a crop camera if it bit them in the a$$.

[pdirestajr]

I'm really tired if the "introduction to" and "upgrade to" full frame comments.

It should be "RETURN TO" full frame!!!

I have an EOS Rebel G fully plastic camera with 3 focus points that is "full frame".

The 6D will just be the most affordable Canon 35mm digital camera.

Why is this considered some type of promise land in photography?

I shoot with all different types of cameras, and the ironic part is I actually use my 7D for the majority of the "professional" work.

[RLPhoto]

My friend and I have been exchanging messages back and forth about the 6D's target demographic.  He would believe that this is aimed at wealthy folks who might leave the camera in an auto mode.  (Hence, no need for the nicer AF of more recent systems.)  I really think otherwise, that it's aimed at enthusiasts.  I'm not looking to win an argument here, I'm just curious what you folks think (by demographic / bucket of people) about to whom this new rig is aimed?

I think we'd all agree that this is principally aimed at people looking to get their first FF camera.  But who are these people?  Just spitballing here, I would guess...

• Enthusiasts who always wanted FF but have always blanched at the price.  This thing seems dead nuts aimed at 60D and 7D users that don't value those cameras for the APS-C length / speed but value them for being 'higher end'. (I know some sports and birding folks who love their 7D for length / speed reasons -- this would not be aimed at them.)
• Journalism / photography students -- textbooks are still built around FF old-school 35mm film lengths and rules, right?  Wouldn't APS-C multiples just foul that up?
• Perhaps a just-starting-out pro photographer's choice until he makes enough money to warrant a pro rig.
• Serious tourists / landscape fans -- people who own tripods and spend a day shooting a national park.
• People who often enlarge their shots and long for better IQ over their APS-C rigs?

Personally, I think the 6D is really a 5D2 with a few nice features to buoy the price for the next 2 years.  The 5D2's price would have plummeted were it left on the market and this was not released, right?

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

For people who have more dollars than cents. 

[pdirestajr]

And while I am ranting:

To the people saying the 6D is for "advanced point-and-shooters"...

Or just people that know how to use a camera and take a photograph.

I bought a 5DII (with it's ancient terrible focusing technology) recently from Canon for 1500(refurb new), popped it on a tripod with a 24mm f/1.4II, switched it over to Manual Focus, dialed in the hyper focal distance, and snapped away some beautiful landscape shots... All in focus! Weird. I also manage to get the auto focus to work too. Bonus!

[dslrdummy]

Seems to me it's targeted at the very same people the 5DC was targeted at back in 2005, new FF owners. I was one when I bought the 5DC in 2006 (for AUD$4,200 including 24-105L). I still have it and it is a great camera with good glass (I've since added the superb 70-200L II IS). But let's look at the comparison and then assess whether the Canon hierarchy have dropped the ball as some here suggest.
The 5D was marketed by Canon (and I think generally regarded) as the world's smallest, lightest and most affordable FF DSLR. Seven years on and the 6D is a smaller, lighter, more affordable and more competent DSLR by almost any measure of specification you want to use.
The 5d is 12.8 mp, the 6D 20.2mp.
The 5D processor was a Digic II, the 6D has a Digic 5+.
The 5D body weighs 810g and measured 6x4.4x3", the 6D 770g and 5.7x4.4x2.8.
The 5D shoots continuously 3fps, the 6D 4.5fps.
The 5D's has 9pt autofocussing (with no cross-type), the 6D 11.
The 5D's LCD was 2.5" and 230k pixels, the 6D's is 3.2" 1024K.
5D ISO is 100-1600 (expandable to 50-3200) and the 6D 100-25,600 (expandable to 50-102,400).
5D has exposure compensation of +/- 2 ev, 6D has +/-5.
5D's viewfinder is 96%, 6D's is 97%.

Add to this the list of things the 6D has that the 5D doesn't - video function, liveview, touch screen, HDMI, built-in wireless, built-in GPS. I may have missed things, but the general point is that it is aimed at the same market but offers more to them at a better price (as you would expect).

I understand why some people might be disappointed with the specs, but I think we get a bit greedy some times. Proof, of course, is in the eating but, at this price, I for one will consider upgrading to the 6d from my 5dC once the detailed peformance reviews are in.

[daniemare]

It for someone like me.  Want to explore FF.  Do not like 4 year old body (5DII).  5DIII to expensive for my abilities.  Haven't upgraded bodies for 3 years, thus the OVF, MP count, FPS and AF is better than what I currently have.

[RLPhoto]

Seems to me it's targeted at the very same people the 5DC was targeted at back in 2005, new FF owners. I was one when I bought the 5DC in 2006 (for AUD$4,200 including 24-105L). I still have it and it is a great camera with good glass (I've since added the superb 70-200L II IS). But let's look at the comparison and then assess whether the Canon hierarchy have dropped the ball as some here suggest.
The 5D was marketed by Canon (and I think generally regarded) as the world's smallest, lightest and most affordable FF DSLR. Seven years on and the 6D is a smaller, lighter, more affordable and more competent DSLR by almost any measure of specification you want to use.
The 5d is 12.8 mp, the 6D 20.2mp.
The 5D processor was a Digic II, the 6D has a Digic 5+.
The 5D body weighs 810g and measured 6x4.4x3", the 6D 770g and 5.7x4.4x2.8.
The 5D shoots continuously 3fps, the 6D 4.5fps.
The 5D's has 9pt autofocussing (with no cross-type), the 6D 11.
The 5D's LCD was 2.5" and 230k pixels, the 6D's is 3.2" 1024K.
5D ISO is 100-1600 (expandable to 50-3200) and the 6D 100-25,600 (expandable to 50-102,400).
5D has exposure compensation of +/- 2 ev, 6D has +/-5.
5D's viewfinder is 96%, 6D's is 97%.

Add to this the list of things the 6D has that the 5D doesn't - video function, liveview, touch screen, HDMI, built-in wireless, built-in GPS. I may have missed things, but the general point is that it is aimed at the same market but offers more to them at a better price (as you would expect).

I understand why some people might be disappointed with the specs, but I think we get a bit greedy some times. Proof, of course, is in the eating but, at this price, I for one will consider upgrading to the 6d from my 5dC once the detailed peformance reviews are in.

I've owned a 5Dc that I Ran its full shutter life into the ground and then purchased a 5D3.

Now considering that a 5Dc can be had for 500$ on craigslist, its still the best camera you can buy for around that price range but the 6D is nothing like the 5Dc a at release.

The 5Dc had no competition in its time, while the 6D has to convice users not to buy a 5D2.

The 5Dc was released as a budget FF camera and still is the Budget FF digital camera, while the 6D isn't.

The 5Dc can still swap focusing screens, and Yes, There is a difference even with the 5D3's magnification.

The 5Dc is a Great camera but Comparing it to the 6D? Not even the same league.

The 6D is more like the 50D to 60D transition.