November 24, 2014, 05:48:09 PM

Author Topic: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all  (Read 40354 times)

Nishi Drew

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 254
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #15 on: October 04, 2012, 04:56:24 AM »
We're not going to see user reports and full reviews until early next year, no one's going to have one at the end of this year except a lucky few. What you see at Photokina isn't final anyways, Sony decided to change up their RX1 a little, though that's about it and it wasn't a great change anyways. And honestly, how about just adding three accurate AF points? Center and 2 on the sides for portrait orientation? Ok, shouldn't get wishful, it didn't and won't happen.
One thing that could change though is the price, but we won't see anything as there's plenty wallets waiting in line.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #15 on: October 04, 2012, 04:56:24 AM »

AprilForever

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 740
    • View Profile
    • AprilForever.com
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #16 on: October 04, 2012, 05:30:48 AM »
I am sure that the 6D is not bad at all... However, it is not a 7D, so my heart is saddened...

I'll get a 6D in about three years... After I have recovered from the purchase of my 7D mark II!!!
What is truth?

birtembuk

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 116
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #17 on: October 04, 2012, 05:38:00 AM »
I bet it will be great. And I'm going to buy one as a second cam for macro and night photography, where I almost always use a single-point focus. High ISO rules. Candle-lit photos make me cry. And I don't give a damn anymore with mega-pickles and the ho-so biased objective dxolabs reviews.

Marine03

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 138
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #18 on: October 04, 2012, 06:15:26 AM »
I don't usually mind a bit of a wait from announcement until release but this seems to long, made worse by the fact Nikon had theirs on shelfs the next week, and Apple releases their products within 2 weeks of announcements.   Does announcing 4 months before availability save a business that much money? 

O and I can't wait to read some reviews
6D, 450D(collecting dust), Nifty Fifty, 565EX Flash

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5080
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2012, 07:02:13 AM »
Does announcing 4 months before availability save a business that much money?

No, but it does make sure the all predecessor boxes are sold and it might prove that Canon still hasn't got a grip on hardware manufacturing again (1dx, 24-70ii delays, 5d3/650d issues). Or maybe they simply need more time to develop the firmware/software for the really new features like gps and wifi. Whatever it is, it's probably not about saving money but more about logistics or development.

bbasiaga

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 172
  • Canon Shooter
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2012, 08:40:43 AM »
The logistical issue probably has to do with the timing of the show.  Photonika is when it is, and it probably makes a lot of sense to launch it there, as opposed to set up one of those press events Canon likes to do for announcements. 

Delays from the announced date are probably production/frimware related issues.   I'm basing that on how things work in my end of the consumer goods industry.

-Brian

JohanCruyff

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #21 on: October 04, 2012, 09:22:21 AM »
1 dead pixel out of 24,300,000.....  how awful.  I wonder when the last time was that someone looked at a picture and saw a dead pixel.

Don't sweat it.  Dead pixels are common.

If you have 24,300,000 pixels, the chances of a dead pixel are about 20% higher than if you have just 20,400,000, ceteris paribus::)   ::)   ::)
 
Italian amateur. Gear: i) 5d Classic, 17-40 F/4 L, 24-105mm F/4 IS L, 100mm F/2.8 IS L, 70-200 F/4 IS L. & EOS M, 22 F/2, 18-55 + Mount Adapter, 55-250 F/4-5.6 IS STM
ii) Wife: Canon G12
iii) First Daughter: Canon 1100D, 18-55 IS iv) Son: Canon A1000IS v) Second Daughter: Nikon L21

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #21 on: October 04, 2012, 09:22:21 AM »

DarkKnightNine

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 171
  • The best camera is the one that's with you.
    • View Profile
    • Marven Payne Creative Visuals
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #22 on: October 04, 2012, 07:41:15 PM »
Oh yeah it is:
Canon 6D Preview - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly, & The Competition


I'm calling it crap (yes I know it hasn't been released yet and I don't care).
After using the 5D Mark III and know what it is and isn't capable of, I know that they've stripped waaay to much off this camera to make it worth the asking price especially in comparison to the competition. The reason why I'm calling it crap is not because it's performance, it's because Canon DID NOT have to strip this camera down this much and could have provided more of a robust camera at this price point. The 6D could have truly been something awesome. It was stupidity and arrogance the lead to the decisions made on this camera, nothing more. I for one, feel insulted. Now all of you Canon fanboys are welcome to flame me but you are not helping yourself or Canon by defending their arrogance. You should be fanning your flames toward Canon and perhaps they will get the message that we aren't going to stand for this anymore. I love my Canon gear but enough is enough.
Canon 1DX, Canon 5D Mark III, EF 85mm F1.2L II USM, EF 100mm F2.8L IS USM Macro, EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM, EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM, EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS II USM, 600EX-RT Speedlites, Profoto Studio Strobes, and a whole lot of boat load of light modifiers.

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5080
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #23 on: October 05, 2012, 06:36:15 AM »
The 6D could have truly been something awesome. It was stupidity and arrogance the lead to the decisions made on this camera, nothing more. I for one, feel insulted

Indeed - but the problem is that this doesn't matter to Canon at all, why should it? It doesn't make a difference to them if you just "normally" don't buy the 6d or if you "really, really, not at all" don't buy it - in their books it's the binary sold or not sold. And there will be enough people getting hooked on the ff + gps & wifi once the 6d drops under $2000, which I expect to happen in no time.

Rebel amateurs will frequently switch brands due to daily discount, and pros won't do it at all if not pressed. Canon's one problem would be enthusiasts switching to Nikon, but as far as I can see this isn't happening in numbers, Canon users are either buying the 5d3 now (that's why the price is going up), saving for it or waiting for the next body. Me included, I'm not willing to get a Nikon that doesn't run Magic Lantern :-o

dswatson83

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #24 on: October 05, 2012, 03:34:09 PM »
What remains to be seen is if Canon can sell a $2200 consumer camera...which is basically what the 6D is. I don't see it having much of a place in a Pro photographers bag. The 6D will take great picture, but it is limited in its appeal unlike the D600 which satisfies enough professional features to make it a good 2nd body, backup, or even a 1st body for someone on a budget. I just don't like the ergonomics and video issues with the D600 were to big for me to ever get this camera even though I seriously considered it. This review just showed some things I can't get over. The 5D3 is the perfect camera for my shooting style and I thought maybe the D600, though lacking some features, could handle my shooting style for $1000 less. These videos seem like the answer is no...though the photo quality is awesome.

Nikon D600 Review Part 6 - Low Light, High ISO test...And a surprise problem
« Last Edit: October 05, 2012, 03:35:40 PM by dswatson83 »

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 5080
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #25 on: October 05, 2012, 04:41:01 PM »
though the photo quality is awesome.

Please never post Nikon iso comparison shots on a Canon site again, Nkon's iso1600=iso100 and Nikon's iso3200 equaling Canon's aps-c iso100 will increase suicide rates of Canon owners so much there won't be people left to buy the 6d. Not that there would be many to begin with.

Woody

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #26 on: October 05, 2012, 07:13:09 PM »
Nope, it isn't, it's the same as the 5d2 with added low-light capability, read the specs: It has only a horizontal f2.8-sensitive line, i.e. if that cannot achieve focus it falls back to the f5.6 lines. I didn't understand that at first either, but Dr. Neuro explained :-) ... and this is my biggest grief with the 6d, it's anti-tuned for f2.8 lenses just like the 5d3/1dx af is tuned for them. It's made for the 24-105/4L (kit) and 17-40/4L (Canon did the sample shots with this)

And the center AF point of the 5D2 works well. The limitation of this AF sensor is in tracking as well as the peripheral points. Since the 6D center AF works at -3 eV compared to -0.2 eV on the 5D2 and -2 eV on the 5D3, one cannot draw immediate conclusions WITHOUT even trying the camera.

Another thing, ALL the cross AF sensors on the D600 are clustered around the center. Of what use is that?
« Last Edit: October 05, 2012, 07:17:55 PM by Woody »

poias

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 169
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #27 on: October 05, 2012, 07:30:13 PM »
Nope, it isn't, it's the same as the 5d2 with added low-light capability, read the specs: It has only a horizontal f2.8-sensitive line, i.e. if that cannot achieve focus it falls back to the f5.6 lines. I didn't understand that at first either, but Dr. Neuro explained :-) ... and this is my biggest grief with the 6d, it's anti-tuned for f2.8 lenses just like the 5d3/1dx af is tuned for them. It's made for the 24-105/4L (kit) and 17-40/4L (Canon did the sample shots with this)

And the center AF point of the 5D2 works well. The limitation of this AF sensor is in tracking as well as the peripheral points. Since the 6D center AF works at -3 eV compared to -0.2 eV on the 5D2 and -2 eV on the 5D3, one cannot draw immediate conclusions WITHOUT even trying the camera.

Another thing, ALL the cross AF sensors on the D600 are clustered around the center. Of what use is that?

Actually, all full-frame cameras with optical phase detection AF sensors are clustered around the center. D600 is slightly more so... take a look at the comparison between D600 vs D800... not much difference. I use my D600 to get enough negative space, plus it is real plus when it comes to action(when things are centered):


canon rumors FORUM

Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #27 on: October 05, 2012, 07:30:13 PM »

Woody

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #28 on: October 05, 2012, 09:39:26 PM »
Actually, all full-frame cameras with optical phase detection AF sensors are clustered around the center. D600 is slightly more so... take a look at the comparison between D600 vs D800... not much difference. I use my D600 to get enough negative space, plus it is real plus when it comes to action(when things are centered):

I was only referring to the CROSS AF sensors.

The cross sensors on Nikon AF sensors are all clustered around the center, it's just a matter of spread which is particularly poor on the D600. The 5D3 and 1DX cross sensors are more distributed. This is why I wonder what advantage the D600 AF sensor has over the 6D, except for tracking.

D800 cross sensors marked in orange:


D600 cross sensors marked in red:


5D3 cross sensors marked in bold:
« Last Edit: October 05, 2012, 09:42:09 PM by Woody »

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1895
    • View Profile
Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #29 on: October 05, 2012, 09:46:02 PM »
I'm calling it crap (yes I know it hasn't been released yet and I don't care).
...
Now all of you Canon fanboys are welcome to flame me but you are not helping yourself or Canon by defending their arrogance. You should be fanning your flames toward Canon and perhaps they will get the message that we aren't going to stand for this anymore. I love my Canon gear but enough is enough.
I wouldn't flame you. I have a 5DII and I have already called 6D a joke camera.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Looks like the 6D may not be so bad after all
« Reply #29 on: October 05, 2012, 09:46:02 PM »